The 1620 Project and its Critics

[link removed][UNIQID]

CounterCurrent: Week of 4/12
The 1620 Project and its Critics

CounterCurrent is the National Association of Scholars’ weekly newsletter, bringing you the biggest issues in academia and our responses to them.
[link removed][UNIQID]
Category: 1620 Project; Reading Time: ~2 minutes
------------------------------------------------------------


** Featured Article - Missing the Point of Plymouth Rock by David Randall ([link removed][UNIQID])
------------------------------------------------------------

Since its release in August 2019, The New York Times’ 1619 Project ([link removed][UNIQID]) has come under fire from a plethora of scholars and organizations, who rightly point out its flagrant historical errors and overt ideological agenda. The Project has also prompted several large-scale campaigns in response, including The Woodson Center’s “1776 Project ([link removed][UNIQID]) ” and NAS’s own “1620 Project ([link removed][UNIQID]) ”.

If you are not familiar with the specific claims and critiques of The 1619 Project, check out our website ([link removed][UNIQID]) to view the many articles we have written on the subject. NAS President Peter Wood has also written a new book, titled 1620: The True Beginning of the American Republic ([link removed][UNIQID]) , which is available for pre-order ([link removed][UNIQID]) and set for release this fall. But for today, what concerns us are not the critiques themselves, but a critique of the critiques.

Dr. John Turner ([link removed][UNIQID]) is a professor of religious studies at George Mason University, where he specializes in American religion, Mormonism, and the history of colonial New England. He also recently wrote They Knew They Were Pilgrims: Plymouth Colony and the Contest for American Liberty ([link removed][UNIQID]) . These accolades should qualify him to speak on 1620-related matters with some degree of scholarly authority. However, what follows in his criticism of our project is rather underwhelming and misses the point.

Writing for National Review, Turner’s piece is titled “No One Year Can Unlock the Meaning of America ([link removed][UNIQID]) .” His argument is essentially just that, though what it means to “unlock the meaning of America” is not totally clear. Yet Turner seeks that which thoroughly, definitively, and maybe even perfectly, explains our country’s founding. Of course that does not exist. History is never so cut-and-dry, particularly surrounding the genesis of a nation.

Turner goes on to substantiate this unremarkable claim with various historical data points, positioning himself as what I like to call the “enlightened centrist.” That is, someone who tries to act as a neutral observer and tends to make claims like “no one is totally right” or “there is no completely true perspective.” By doing so, they usually avoid promoting any mainstream or established perspective because “It’s more nuanced than that.”

Sure, there may not be a perfectly airtight history of anything. This is part of why the field of history itself continues to thrive—there almost always exists new information that sheds fresh light on a particular event, person, or place. But that doesn’t mean that all existing perspectives are equally true (or untrue). There are interpretations more sound than others, and it’s the job of historians to discern fact from fiction.

The 1619 Project is a fiction-loaded account with a dash of fact sprinkled throughout. In this week’s featured article ([link removed][UNIQID]) , NAS Director of Research David Randall rebuts Turner’s article and explains why the Plymouth-centered 1620 Project is not only a valid point of view, but the most fact-filled account of America’s founding. It’s not perfect, but it’s one of the best we’ve got. As Randall writes:

“Every generation of Americans has built upon the traditions of liberty they inherited from Plymouth, and every generation of Americans has meditated upon what we owe to Plymouth. Plymouth becomes more important with every year, not less, as the ripples of its impact grow and grow. There is a wonderful, complex story to be told of how Plymouth and 1620 roots itself ever deeper in the American present. To pretend that story does not exist is not to be sophisticated, but to be blind.”

Be sure to keep an eye out for our continual 1620 Project ([link removed][UNIQID]) content, as well as Peter Wood’s upcoming book, 1620 ([link removed][UNIQID]) .

Until next week.

John David
Communications Associate
National Association of Scholars
Read More ([link removed][UNIQID])
For more on The 1620 Project:
[link removed][UNIQID]

March 16, 2020


** The New York Times Revises The 1619 Project, Barely ([link removed][UNIQID])
------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Wood

After more than six months of criticism from historians, The New York Times has very slightly revised part of The 1619 Project. It's a start, but we hope they will do more.

[link removed][UNIQID]

March 03, 2020


** Excluding Experts ([link removed][UNIQID])
------------------------------------------------------------

NAS

Nikole Hannah-Jones ought to step up, be courageous, and debate the historians with whom she disagrees, argues Peter Wood in a recent essay.

[link removed][UNIQID]

February 20, 2020


** The Economics and Politics of The 1619 Project ([link removed][UNIQID])
------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Wood, Phillip W. Magness and Robert Cherry

Robert Cherry and Phil Magness join Peter W. Wood to discuss The 1619 Project, including its dubious portrayal of the economics of American slavery.

[link removed][UNIQID]

November 15, 2019


** The Truth About America's Founding and Slavery ([link removed][UNIQID])
------------------------------------------------------------

Daniel Davis

During this in-depth interview, Allen Guelzo talks about the New York Times' 1619 project, reparations, capitalism and its role in our history, and more.


** About the NAS
------------------------------------------------------------
The National Association of Scholars, founded in 1987, emboldens reasoned scholarship and propels civil debate. We’re the leading organization of scholars and citizens committed to higher education as the catalyst of American freedom.

============================================================
Follow NAS on social media.
** Facebook ([link removed][UNIQID])
** Twitter ([link removed][UNIQID])
** YouTube ([link removed][UNIQID])
** Website ([link removed][UNIQID])
** Donate ([link removed][UNIQID])
| ** Join ([link removed][UNIQID])
| ** Renew ([link removed][UNIQID])
| ** Bookstore ([link removed][UNIQID])
Copyright © 2020 National Association of Scholars, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website, membership or donation forms, contact forms at events, or by signing open letters.

Our mailing address is:
National Association of Scholars
420 Madison Avenue
7th Floor
New York, NY 10017-2418
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.