Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Fury From The Left After George Will Calls 1619 Project “Historical Illiteracy” and “Not Innocent Ignorance”

Fury From The Left After George Will Calls 1619 Project “Historical Illiteracy” and “Not Innocent Ignorance”

And he did it at WaPo, leftists’ safe space. Race card played: “Will should’ve just written Hannah-Jones was ‘uppity'”

Washington Post columnist George Will understandably is not most Republicans’ cup of tea considering his abandonment of the party, which started well before his hatred for Donald Trump became a thing.

But he wrote a column last week that deliciously ripped apart the “1619 Project” and the New York Times’ amplification of it, in the process enraging “woke” leftists who didn’t appreciate the inconvenient truths he told about the project’s creator Nikole Hannah-Jones’ flagrant rewriting of history.

In it, Will examined the central component of Nikole Hannah-Jones’ deeply flawed argument: That the basis for the American Revolution was to preserve slavery. That claim and many others she made have been discredited by scholars and historians alike, but because the New York Times published it and because she received so many seemingly prestigious accolades from the usual corners (including a Pulitizer prize) as a result, the “hate America” contingent of the Democratic party latched on to it as “further proof” that America was “systemically racist” from the start.

Because this myth persists, and because tenets of it in concert with CRT are being taught as subject matter on college campuses and in some public school classrooms as part of a larger plan by so-called progressives to radically transform America into something it’s not, Will decided to tackle the claim as well:

[Claim:] The war was supposedly ignited by a November 1775 British offer of freedom to Blacks who fled slavery and joined British forces. Well.

That offer came after increasingly volcanic American reactions to various British provocations: After the 1765 Stamp Act. After the 1770 Boston Massacre. After the 1773 Boston Tea Party. After the 1774 Coercive Acts (including closure of Boston’s port) and other events of “The Long Year of Revolution” (the subtitle of Mary Beth Norton’s “1774”). And after, in 1775, the April 19 battles of Lexington and Concord, the June 17 battle of Bunker Hill and George Washington on July 3 assuming command of the Continental Army.

Writing history is not like doing physics. But event A cannot have caused event B if B began before A.

Will also referenced comments by Gordon S. Wood, who he described as “today’s foremost scholar of America’s Founding.” At a recent speaking engagement, Wood suggested that “the New York Times has the history completely backwards,” pointing out that when the war started, Britain “was not threatening to abolish slavery in its empire” and that colonists in the north were forming abolition movements in 1776:

“It was the American colonists who were interested in abolitionism in 1776. … Not only were the northern states the first slaveholding governments in the world to abolish slavery, but the United States became the first nation in the world to begin actively suppressing the despicable international slave trade. The New York Times has the history completely backwards.”

Will concluded his piece by noting that the New York Times’ claim that American exceptionalism stems in large part from slavery and racism proves that “the 1619 Project’s historical illiteracy is not innocent ignorance.” At its core, Will correctly concluded that the purpose behind the project was to “service … progressivism’s agenda,” not to correct any alleged historical inaccuracies.

It did not take long for the Usual Suspects to start trotting out the race cards and related words like “white supremacy” in an attempt to deflect from his argument (perhaps because they couldn’t refute it):

Melanie Sill, who was the executive editor of the Raleigh News and Observer at the time the Duke lacrosse rape allegations were made, also went after Will, claiming his column was “as intellectually dishonest as anything I’ve ever read,” saying “it’s a reminder that those who cannot be curious and reconsider beliefs should not be journalists”:

It was an especially laughable attack when one considers her and her  former paper’s very central roles in perpetuating the rape hoax with daily unsubstantiated “reporting” that they later admitted relied too heavily on statements made by disgraced former District Attorney Mike Nifong.

This Twitter user summed up Will’s column and the leftist outrage on it perfectly:

But even the biggest lies can be exposed, which is exactly what has happened with the continued pushback from critics of Hannah-Jones, the NY Times, and their project. And no matter where the debunking comes from, whether it’s from distinguished commentators and educators conservatives like or anti-Trump columnists they don’t, it’s something that needs to keep happening because radical leftists should not be allowed to get away with such a contemptuous attempt at rewriting American history and in the process completely (and deliberately) undoing its foundations.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I’m not a big George WIll fan but he’s right. America didn’t invent these issues.

He’s 100% correct.

    Bisley in reply to UJ. | December 20, 2021 at 2:09 pm

    Not quite — “1619” is neither ignorance, or illiteracy. It’s part of a Marxist program to undermine history, truth and tradition, and to create racial hatred that Democrats can direct for their political benefit.

Proving once again that the left is driven by hate and lies.

    Martin in reply to irv. | December 19, 2021 at 11:28 am

    This is because even when they are forced to admit something is a lie, they will be back in a couple of months still pushing it as truth to people who didn’t see the admission or don’t remember it. They just admitted that the Steele dossier was a lie payed for by Hillary Clinton and they are back talking about it as true again.

    MAJack in reply to irv. | December 19, 2021 at 11:45 am

    When you don’t have the facts on your side, you reach for lies.

      dr. frank in reply to MAJack. | December 23, 2021 at 1:26 pm

      Or, you end up with same old tired “White Privilege, racist, homophobe, misogynist,” name calling. Can’t defend their position.

    When you have to lie to make your case, you have no case to make.

    Where else would this moron – or the likes of Maxine Waters – be working?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Good for George.

He really didn’t go far enough. Jones is not only ignorant, she’s stupid, and a blatant, full-on racist. Any literate society would feed her into the shredder of history. The New York Times, and her defenders, should be ashamed (I know, I know…) and at the very least should move to Somalia. I’m sure they’d fit right it.

Capable of giving anyone the shudders AND the willies, Ya walking down the sidewalk and this grouping is seen approaching,

Ayanna Pressley
Symone Sanders
Stacy Adams
Nikole Hannah-Jones

Would rival the defensive front line of the Pittsburgh Steelers in their 1970s era. Even Jack Lambert (#58), terrific linebacker behind the Steel Curtain, and his missing teeth was more attractive than these “ladies.”

Nikole Hannah-Jones has no clue – because she’s red…

Finally, something that I agree with George Will on.
OK, I like his baseball writing, too.

A broken clock is right twice a day. That said George Will dedicated himself completely to the crusade to put people like NHJ in charge of education at every level of government and backed a man who campaigned for president on “RACE RAAAACE UBER ALLES!” so don’t let your opinion of him go up.

The Friendly Grizzly | December 19, 2021 at 11:06 am

“Will should’ve just written Hannah-Jones was ‘uppity’”

I agree.

At least we are getting a list of who has joined the Marxists.

Part of education is hearing total BS and rejecting it. parents need to stay involved with their kids education. As for adults that believe 1619, we’ve always had gullible people living amongst us. I can’t help them.

“Nikole Hannah-Jones: Pulitzer Prize Winner”

She didn’t win a prize, it was given away.

Poor George Will has been lying in bed with the leftists for so long he forgot he’s not allowed to speak the truth.

    henrybowman in reply to Peabody. | December 19, 2021 at 12:00 pm

    Over the past two (I believe) years, we’ve had two Pulitzer Prizes awarded for “work” that has already been proven to be nothing but packs of lies. Not to mention the Nobel Peace Prize given to a guy whose presidential chair was barely warm, and who then went on to launch seven military offensives. “Award-winning” really doesn’t mean crap anymore, other than “some crook complimented some other crook.”

      Ben Kent in reply to henrybowman. | December 19, 2021 at 6:26 pm

      “EQUITY” IS DRIVING AWARDS THESE DAYS

      The guilt-ridden radical leftists feel like the award were given to mostly Whites until about 10 years ago and so they want to make up for it.

      Hence the multiple awards to any Black person – regardless of accomplishment. This is the racism of low expectations. EVERYONE knows these people are far less accomplished – but they do it out of pity and guilt.

      Liberal do more damage to the Black community than any one – but they are REALLY proficient at propaganda that makes them seems like saviors.

    Downvoted you by accident!

    She deserves a Pulitzer like Obama deserved a Nobel prize.

    It’s disgusting. This disease has now overtaken our military.

“To call a Pulitzer, MacArthur, Polk winning author “illiterate” is beyond disgusting…. Will should’ve just written Hannah-Jones was “uppity”. Using the term illiterate he’s not only questioning her scholarship, he’s questioning if she should even be considered an authority on a project she’s worked her entire life on.”

How dare George Will accuse accoladed, award-winning Hannah-Jones of being… just like accoladed, award-winning fraud Michael Bellesiles…?

George Will has discovered that the left won’t accept him even as he sabotaged the right, so now he runs back. His column was useful.

The left always tells us who and what they fear. The attacks on Will are an endorsement of what he said.

e pluribus unum | December 19, 2021 at 1:20 pm

I suggest we start saying, “the WS word(s)” instead of the racial slur that has been slapped on anyone who disagrees with black lives matter. It’s an offensive term that Hanna-Jones and others use profligately to describe people who are not black or brown. It has to end or be banished to the same place the “N-word” has gone.

The only redeeming quality on George Will is that
Charles Krauthammer found him redeemable. At the time of Krauthammer’s death, Will’s eulogy gave deference to him as being his ‘lode star’. How deeply we miss Charles and who now rests in peace knowing he tried but failed.

Notice that none of Will’s critics have argued the facts as he has done so eloquently. They are nothing but a bunch of ad hominem attacks.

In debate, we learned, “If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If the facts aren’t on your side, attack your opponent.” Ad hominem attacks are reliable signs that the people making the attacks cannot win on the facts.

Notice how the Marxists always have to pick some person who falls into the category of “he/she-who-can’t-be-criticized” to front for their failed, evil idealogy.

Greta Thunberg? How dare you attack a child with Aspergers! Nicole Hannah-Jones? How dare you attack a black woman! Barack Obama? The only reason you wouldn’t vote for him is because you’re racist! Hillary Clinton? The only reason you wouldn’t vote for her, you deplorable, is because you’re a misogynist with a tiny penis who can’t stand the idea of a powerful woman!

Also note, we were of course lied to when the left told us that they only wanted to tear down Confederate statues. Trump was called delusional when he said they’d get around to tearing down statues of Jefferson. Guess what, predictably (if you’ve seen this movie before) they did. And also statues of Columbus. After all, the left has adopted the mantra of “No borders, no walls, no U.S.A at all!” Sure, it’s only Antifa/#BLM that shouts it openly. But as Nicole Hanna-Jones and the rest of the left demonstrate, they believe it as well.

Because what Marxists always must do is destroy actual history before they impose a rewritten historical narrative on their conquered peoples.

Finally, it’s no mystery that the left makes saints out of violent criminals like George Floyd. Because after the Bolshevik revolution the communists declared “ordinary” criminals a friendly social element. Because of course they were only criminals because the “inequities” of the oppressive czarist/capitalist system drove them to crime. Or as the demonstrably Marxist critical racist theorists would have you believe, criminals (as if there are no white criminals) were only driven to crime because of the “inequities” of the oppressive racist/capitalist system.

Such a thin play book these people have.

Chuckin Houston | December 19, 2021 at 8:22 pm

The 1619 Project is nothing more than a modern, American version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

This poisonous nitwit knew that she was expressing a fraud.

May she be ignored.

George Will despite his rejection of Trump deserves much kudos for attacking the totally false revisionist history peddled by the 1619 Project

It was only written and lauded to cover up the real history of the democrat party

There was a time when I couldn’t wait for the every-other-week Will opinion piece in Newsweek. It was usually interesting and well-written.

He’s of no particular interest to me now but props to him for going to the trouble of penning the meticulous take-down.

Shorter, ink-saving version: 1619 is Bullsh*t.

AnAdultInDiapers | December 20, 2021 at 4:14 am

I find “Not only were the northern states the first slaveholding governments in the world to abolish slavery” somewhat disingenuous given he’s speaking about the UK’s stance. Slavery was already and had for some time been illegal in the UK.

What I haven’t been able to find is when it became illegal. Multiple slaves are recorded in the Domesday Book (but were apparently the wrong skin colour so don’t count) but the Somerset case in 1772 affirmed that slavery was illegal.

Still, the US did indeed abolish the trans-Atlantic slave trade 23 days before the UK did, and did take action against slavers in North Africa even before that.

    SLAVERY OFFICIALLY ENDED IN the UK IN 1833

    The 1833 Slavery Abolition Act.. British trade in slaves stopped in 1807.

    Northern states in the USA passed laws that stopped slaves from being brought into the states in the late 1700’s.

    At least 250,000 whites were enslaved as indentured servants which typically required that they work for at least 5 years. Only about 40 percent of indentured servants lived to complete the terms of their contracts. Female servants were often the subject of harassment from their masters. A woman who became pregnant while a servant often had years tacked on to the end of her service time. See … https://www.ushistory.org/US/5b.asp

      Sultan in reply to Ben Kent. | December 20, 2021 at 4:49 pm

      Indentured servitude lasted into the 20th century and in milder forms still exists today all over the world. It is simply a contract, freely agreed, to trade labor for a fixed period of time for some form of compensation. I was told my father came to the US from Germany in 1920 by agreeing to work on a farm in the midwest for a couple of years in exchange for his passage, a small wage, room and board and a specified “bonus” at the end of the period. It worked just fine. Professional athletes are current examples. Of course there can be abuses and breaches of the agreement by either side, but the courts can and do sort those out.

      AnAdultInDiapers in reply to Ben Kent. | December 21, 2021 at 2:57 pm

      > SLAVERY OFFICIALLY ENDED IN the UK IN 1833

      No. Slavery was already officially ended in the UK long long before that – I even quoted a court case to you over half a century earlier that confirmed it.

      1833 is when slavery was banned across the rest of the British Empire. If the US hadn’t separated from the Empire slavery would have ended in the US decades before it eventually did.

      I’m not sure what your comment on indentured servants is in response to.

The prize you get in a box of Cracker Jack is worth more than the Nobel and Pulitzer prizes.

Sideshow Bob has a sister?? Who knew??

You know you are over the target when you are taking heavy fire.

Talk about inconvenient truths. Slavery on the African continent existed for hundreds of years prior to the discovery of America. It was Africans who captured and sold their own people to the slavers, Therefor I no longer have no time for the entire American slavery story. Africans are the root cause.

Lybrarious Booker | December 21, 2021 at 11:44 am

I was a devout follower of George Will, back in the 1980’s when he was right about every political issue of the time.

Sad what has happened to him: like finding out your high school sweetheart has turned into a junkie and turns tricks on skid row.

Comanche Voter | December 21, 2021 at 5:16 pm

Historically illiterate sounds about right.

A hyphenated last name combined with her “natural red hair” makes me a doubter.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode