4 ms·

I mean the 1619 project is education as indoctrination and it's making it's way into curriculum. The aim isn't to educate (i.e. teach how to think, explore kno

I mean the 1619 project is education as indoctrination and it's making it's way into curriculum. The aim isn't to educate (i.e. teach how to think, explore knowledge, form and examine arguments, etc.; not what to think) but form opinion and install ideology.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
By simply saying "The aim isn't to educate [...] but form opinion and install ideology" you're doing exactly what you're accusing them of, which is to make an unsubstantiated claim and expect others to believe it. Aim higher.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Can you elaborate on your concern? The authors of the 1619 project agree that it's not a neutral historical review - the lead author has consistently said that it's "reframing history", "using history and reporting to make an argument", "explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative". It's infeasible to expect commenters to provide detailed citations for every fact they reference.
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    My 'concern' was clear. He was doing what he accused others of doing. > The authors of the 1619 project agree that it's not a neutral historical review cite? > "reframing history" I'm not sure what that means but link, please? > "using history and reporting to make an argument" What's your objection to that? Should they have used bluster and lies instead - what do you want? (and cite for that quote, pls) > "explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative" If the national narrative was wrong then that's reasonable (and cite, pls) > It's infeasible to expect commenters to provide detailed citations for every fact they reference. Perhaps, but some backup is necessary for verification.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      Respectfully, your questions can be easily answered by reading the 1619 project. For example, every article within the project contains the following insert, describing it as an activist effort and containing the quote about "reframing history": > The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative. If you want a specific link, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/blac... was the first article, but as I mentioned this insert is present in all the others.
      - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
        You're presuming I'm american. I'm a brit and only heard about the 1619 project an hour ago here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24262679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24262679. Regarding the quote, I don't entirely see the problem. I mean the consequences of slavery have not been fully appreciated (are they taught in US schools in depth?). > "the contributions of black Americans" In your view, have such contributions by black americans been fully recognised? Because if they are the 1619 project is redundant, if they have not then perhaps 1619 has a valid purpose. From what you've posted, the 1619 project may be flawed but it doesn't come across as "indoctrination and "install[ing] ideology" as the original poster said in the above link.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Nikole Hannah Jones (the creator) has been pretty explicit about wanting to "control the narrative." It's activism masquerading as history, regardless of whether they claim it to be otherwise. https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1287744904526012417?s=20 https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1287744904526012417?...
        6y ago

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago

By simply saying "The aim isn't to educate [...] but form opinion and install ideology" you're doing exactly what you're accusing them of, which is to make an unsubstantiated claim and expect others to believe it. Aim higher.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Can you elaborate on your concern? The authors of the 1619 project agree that it's not a neutral historical review - the lead author has consistently said that it's "reframing history", "using history and reporting to make an argument", "explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative". It's infeasible to expect commenters to provide detailed citations for every fact they reference.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  My 'concern' was clear. He was doing what he accused others of doing. > The authors of the 1619 project agree that it's not a neutral historical review cite? > "reframing history" I'm not sure what that means but link, please? > "using history and reporting to make an argument" What's your objection to that? Should they have used bluster and lies instead - what do you want? (and cite for that quote, pls) > "explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative" If the national narrative was wrong then that's reasonable (and cite, pls) > It's infeasible to expect commenters to provide detailed citations for every fact they reference. Perhaps, but some backup is necessary for verification.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Respectfully, your questions can be easily answered by reading the 1619 project. For example, every article within the project contains the following insert, describing it as an activist effort and containing the quote about "reframing history": > The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative. If you want a specific link, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/blac... was the first article, but as I mentioned this insert is present in all the others.
    - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
      You're presuming I'm american. I'm a brit and only heard about the 1619 project an hour ago here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24262679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24262679. Regarding the quote, I don't entirely see the problem. I mean the consequences of slavery have not been fully appreciated (are they taught in US schools in depth?). > "the contributions of black Americans" In your view, have such contributions by black americans been fully recognised? Because if they are the 1619 project is redundant, if they have not then perhaps 1619 has a valid purpose. From what you've posted, the 1619 project may be flawed but it doesn't come across as "indoctrination and "install[ing] ideology" as the original poster said in the above link.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Nikole Hannah Jones (the creator) has been pretty explicit about wanting to "control the narrative." It's activism masquerading as history, regardless of whether they claim it to be otherwise. https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1287744904526012417?s=20 https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1287744904526012417?...
        6y ago