Historically inaccurate 1619 Project ‘perfect tool for making angry, anti-American activists,’ critic says

While thousands of educators across the nation continue to adapt materials from the discredited 1619 Project into their curriculum as the media runs interference against claims of Critical Race Theory being taught in schools, prominent scholars are speaking up about the goal, not to educate, but to produce “angry, anti-American” “left-wing social activists.”

In 2019, New York Times Magazine journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones began the 1619 Project as a “much-need corrective,” in her opinion, toward the understanding of the past. Since then her revisionist history, which critiques every aspect that predated the founding of America up to and including the present, has been disseminated with apparent impunity for the founders’ alleged purveyance of falsehoods.

In fact, as Fox News Digital reported, American Federation of Teachers union president Randi Weingarten has openly supported the project saying, “All of a sudden you’re hearing people … who are trying to ban the 1619 Project, because it is trying to … actually teach a factual version of oppression in America.”

Such notions were readily discredited by historians who demanded The New York Times correct the inaccuracies which ultimately led even Hannah-Jones to admit that she is “not a professional educator” and she does not possess “a degree in social studies or science” and so her work is not history.

Therefore, as Mary Graber, the author of “Debunking the 1619 Project” concluded, the goal of using these materials is to make students, “activists, which is what a lot of teachers want to do. There are too many woke teachers. They’ve been trained in colleges of education to produce not knowledgeable citizens, but left-wing social activists.”

“The 1619 Project is the perfect tool for making angry, anti-American student activists,” Graber told Fox News and added that it is essentially, “history told through the lens of critical race theory…” as it substitutes “objectivity with narrative storytelling.”

City University of New York Graduate Center professor James Oakes furthered Graber’s point on this selective lens by stating, “When you say racism is built into the DNA of the United States, or that it’s America’s original sin – [it means] those things are unchanging. And that, to me, is not just ahistorical, it’s almost anti-historical.”

To that point, Kentucky State University political science professor Wilfred Reilly told Fox News, “Of course, slavery was part of the history of the United States.”

“The problem with the 1619 Project is that it makes extraordinary sweeping claims,” he said while pointing out that “in 1619 there wasn’t any United States of America,” so that is enough to discredit her claims that racism is intrinsic in the fabric of the founding.

“I think the key message to understand is that [The 1619 Project] is not history … it really is about present-day ideology and power,” researcher Ashley Rindsberg suggested to Fox News Digital adding, in his experience, these claims “just did not match reality.”

“What really bothered me [about the 1619 Project] was that [The New York Times] was so willing to advance the narrative … not even at the expense of the truth, but to change the very conception of what the truth is,” Rindsberg added.

That reality bothered one of The Times’ own columnists as well. Bret Stephens expressed how journalists, who are already criticized as “being fake, biased, partisan and an arm of the radical left” were not stuck associated with hard evidence of fake and biased reporting by The Times.

“Through its overreach, the 1619 Project has given critics of The Times a gift. It’s one thing for a newspaper to publish the 1619 Project by way of challenging its subscribers,” Stephens said. “It’s quite another to become a pedagogical product for schoolchildren who, along with their parents, in most cases probably don’t subscribe.”

“This, he added, “was stepping into the political fray in a way that was guaranteed to invite not just right-wing blowback, but possible federal involvement.”

And the complicit corporate media continues to cover for it because it falls in line with their objectives.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Kevin Haggerty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles