Agenda-driven history chooses agenda over accuracy. https://twitter.com/HashtagGriswold/status/1236000772002897925 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
Read it—carefully. It’s a complicated story. The title catches some of it, but not all of it. The writer is careful and informed. Pay her the compliment of a close reading.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @yeselson
I don't disagree with much of her narration of history or historiograpy. But what she reveals about the 1619 project remains damning. The problem is that Hannah-Jones isn't trying to add to the American story but replace it with something unrecognizable to informed readers.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank
I agree she was too polemical. But it’s complicated because Wilentz was also too polemical—. So writer’s key point is to do careful work up front because, if you don’t, your critics will not be as sympathetic to your project as your expert in-house readers. Like with any brief.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
No Property in Man is a fantastic book, but it does not purport to tell the entire story of pro-slavery thought or action at the time - anyone who reads it can tell that. It's not written in anything like the way Hannah-Jones writes.
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.