NYT Wants to Re-Found America with Its 1619 Project but It’s All Lies
The New York Times has recently commissioned a project that seeks to “reframe” American history. The 1619 Project claims that the History of America as a nation should begin in that year, 1619, as opposed to 1776. Why? Because that is the year when the first African slaves arrived on our shores.
According to the Times, this “re-founding” of America will place “the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center” of the story. After all, it is the moment that forever tainted our existence and what apparently inspired our independence.
The 1619 Project’s author Nikole Hannah-Jones claims that “our democracy’s founding ideals were false when they were written” and that the “white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.”
However, this assertion is not backed up with even a shred of evidence. Hannah-Jones also fails to mention all the examples and evidence that contradict her beliefs. Or did she fail even to research those possibilities?
She might have reason to think differently if she knew about the original draft of the Declaration that referred to black slaves not as property but as “men” and also blasted Kink George III for refusing to prohibit or at least limit “this execrable commerce” of slavery.
Or what about the letters Alexander Hamilton wrote to John Jay expressing his wish that the Revolutionary War would result in the freeing of slaves and making them equal to whites?
Obviously, history didn’t happen like that, but it wasn’t for lack of trying. The sad fact is that the 13 colonies could not agree to become one with a constitution that included the emancipation of slaves. As historian and scholar Harry Jaffa said, “if they had attempted to secure all the rights of all men, they would have ended in no rights secured for any men.”
But that doesn’t mean they just gave up either. They made a compromise for the time being and kept working towards their goal little by little. And it didn’t take long to make progress.
In 1780, legislation banned Americans from working for or investing in the international slave trade. 1787 saw the prohibition of slavery in the area that would become Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin. In 1794, American ships were no longer allowed to engage in the slave trade. The year of
1804 brought an immediate or, in some cases, gradual, end to slavery in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. And in 1808, the importation of slaves was officially banned by Congress.
Do any of these actions sound like those of men who love slavery? No.
Furthermore, the 1619 Project claims that the reason America wanted Independence from England was so slavery could endure and new laws in London were restricting that.
However, this is not historically accurate either.
The truth is that England did not begin to have any sort of argument on the issue of slavery until around 1783, years after America was founded. In fact, the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade itself wasn’t founded until 1787.
And when we look at a worldwide view of the issue, America was one of the first to admit to and try and change those wrongs. Slavery didn’t end until 1834 for the British Empire, 1848 in areas under French rule, 1858k in Portugal and its colonies, 1861 in the Dutch Caribbean colonies, 1886 for Cuba, and 1888 throughout Brazil.
And the rest of the world was even slower to accept abolition. Not until the end of WWI did North Africa stop enslaving Europeans. For China, it was 1910 officially but still practiced until 1949. Slavery ended in 1930 for Korea, 1952 in Qatar, 1962 for Yemen and Saudi Arabia, and 1980 in Mauritania.
And in much of the world, slavery still exists. In fact, the Walk Free international human rights group estimates that about 40.3 million men, women, and children on any given day are victims of slavery in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.
So what we have here is a liberally ran project seeking to rewrite history for their benefit, to paint America anyone who stands for her as racist. How very convenient that we have a presidential election coming up and one that will undoubtedly focus on race and human rights, huh?