There is a compelling contrast between Wilentz's careful dismantling of the 1619 Project's errors and the much-heralded, self-regarding "Twitterstorians" who seek out weak targets to punch down at while ducking these sorts of serious critiques. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-twitterstorians-trying-to-de-trumpify-american-history …pic.twitter.com/H6lL2c5dbz
-
-
Show this thread
-
I find it interesting that
@KevinMKruse, the most famous "Twitterstorian" - who contributed to the 1619 project - has gone very quiet here on his senior colleagues' serious factual critiques of the project, particularly its lead essay.pic.twitter.com/HCEZytkjaN
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What did you think of the 1619 project? Majority of your tweets about it seem to have a very consistent negative tone.
-
That deserves a longer answer but the short one is that, while a corrective to histories underplaying slavery & the black experience is a useful concept, the project was clearly aimed at a different ideological goal & that drove its disregard for the facts.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nicholas Guyatt absolutely eviscerates "liberal" historian Sean Wilentz on fact and substance in threads here.https://twitter.com/NicholasGuyatt/status/1220016940900589568 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If a history professor is teaching opinion shouldn’t they be a professor of rhetoric instead? Thought historians should be inherently fact based.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.