Let's step back and look at the overall effect of Will's opinion piece.
Does any knowledgeable historian seriously doubt the following facts?
1. That slavery existed in the American colonies from 1619 and continued until the end of the Civil War.
2. That non-plantation slavery started during reconstruction and continued in various forms into the 20th century.
From the Wikipedia: "[The book, Slavery by Another Name] explores the forced labor, of prisoners, overwhelmingly African American men, through the convict lease system used by states, local governments, white farmers, and corporations after the American Civil War until World War II in the southern United States."
3 That the 1619 project accurately describes the effects of both forms of slavery. These effects continue to this day:
- Innocent non-whites such as Ahmaud Arbery continue to be murdered on a regular basis.
- The rights of non-whites to vote are under continual attack, as illustrated by the debacle of the recent elections in Wisconsin.
These are the inconvenient truths Will seeks to discredit. He does so in the usual way:
An accurate title would be, "Some statements of the 1619 project are debatable." Instead, Will smears the entire project.
Alas, those who want to discredit the 1619 project can now just say, "George Will, writing in the Washington Post, demonstrates that the 1619 project has an ax to grind". The actual content of this article hardly matters. The smear will make the usual rounds, reinforced by those who never read the original. In the process, it will likely morph into "Everyone knows the 1619 project fake news."
In short, it is regrettable that the editors of the Washington Post have chosen to publish this piece. It would be more appropriate in the New York Post :-)
Posts
