Yet again, the Grey Lady doth protest too much.…
From the article above: "A few notes on this phrase, “true founding”: It was written by a digital editor and approved by me. (Hannah-Jones, as a staff writer at the magazine is not typically involved in matters of digital display language.)" 🤔
I do not understand why the Times cannot put down this bone. Dean Baquet did the project a huge disservice. (See thread by @wesyang)
The paper would have seemed masterfully ethical if it had left Stephens's critique to stand alongside the project. As he wrote, "we’re supposed to report and comment on the political and cultural issues of the day, not become the issue itself."
What if the Times had published the project the way Hannah-Jones introduced it? (“What if I told you that the year 1619 is as important to the American story as the year 1776?”)…
What if they had listened to critiques of their overreach? Defensiveness, as @seanwilentz points out, is "a major tell." And now they are at it again. I had been so pleased that they published a critique from within. Stephens burnished their reputation & they keep tarnishing it.
This comment by Hannah-Jones should have been the spirit of all of the defenses of the project: “I should have been more careful with how I wrote that” (the part about slavery and the revolution)... "and I am tortured by it. I’m absolutely tortured by it.” I applaud her for that.
An epilogue: From The 1619 Project's editor: "Only 8 percent of high school seniors were aware that slavery was the central cause of the Civil War; and fewer than one in four students could identify how certain provisions in the Constitution gave advantages to enslavers.”
Here's some more horrifying information about public education: In 2017, among ADULTS surveyed:
One in four could not name all three branches of government.
33% couldn't name EVEN ONE branch of government.
37% couldn't name A SINGLE First Amendment right.…
Meanwhile: There were over 40,000 concentration camps and ghettos in Europe. In 2018, almost half of Americans couldn't name A SINGLE ONE. When asked about Auschwitz, more than 40% of American adults and fully two-thirds of American Millennials did not know what it was. (cont’d)
Fewer than half of Americans can correctly answer a MULTIPLE CHOICE Q abt how many Jews were killed in the Holocaust. (Pew)

There are many ways in which our schools fail to educate our children. It's unacceptable (but unsurprising) that slavery isn't accurately taught. (cont’d)
American students SHOULD learn the history of slavery. Errors & exaggerations notwithstanding, The 1619 project could have been embraced by everyone across the political spectrum. It's unfortunate––and tragic––that it required a reframing of our founding. (cont’d)
That turned what could have been an apolitical addition to our national understanding of slavery into an ideological program. It took what could have brought us together as a country in a deeper look at our shared history into a way of dividing the country into "us" and "them."

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Pamela Paresky (Habits of a Free Mind) 🧠

Pamela Paresky (Habits of a Free Mind) 🧠 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PamelaParesky

8 Jun
“It is now quite common among journalists to think of opinions not as arguments to be advanced, engaged with, and potentially refuted, but as a kind of viral propaganda with the power to convert readers...” @DamonLinker 1a/…
“On this view, published ideas are a kind of ideological contagion. If the ideas are good, they can serve as a kind of vaccination against evil. But if they are bad, they function as an intellectual and moral pathogen that are better off being eradicated.” @DamonLinker 1b/
In the 1950s, Catholic philosopher, Jacques Maritain, wrote, “If it were true that whoever knows or claims to know truth or justice cannot admit the possibility of a view different from his own...” 2/
Read 25 tweets
13 Oct 19
It’s happening.
“The culture wars are over. The battle is over knowledge.” @SovMichael @SovNations
@peterboghossian @ConceptualJames @HPluckrose
@peterboghossian talks about things that interfere with dialogue. Cites @ConceptualJames’s tweet after Peter pleaded on Twitter for people to restrict using the term “Nazi” for actual Nazis... & was promptly called... (you guessed it...) a Nazi. Link here:
Read 30 tweets
3 Mar 19
In case you were wondering why the grievance studies project matters (@HPluckrose @ConceptualJames @peterboghossian), NEJM published an “auto-ethnography” by a white dr. who concludes that all white doctors are racist. Her evidence? She’s racist and she’s read “White Fragility.”
“White Fragility” seems to form the foundation of the author’s assumptions about 1) her own racism, and 2) the generalizability of her discovery that she is racist to the (presumed racist) actions of every other white doctor in the country.…
According to “white fragility,” wanting to be seen as a unique individual is “narcissism,” and disagreeing with the white fragility ideology is more evidence of white fragility (“defensive moves”) whether a person is angry, afraid, feels guilty, argues, or says nothing.
Read 6 tweets
9 Jan 19
By using the term “so-called” in this tweet, the APA implicitly acknowledges the capriciousness of taking a basket of what they call “traits” (though many are actually behaviors) and labeling them together, “traditional masculinity.”
(@cjprofman, @clayroutledge, @CHSommers)
Identifying behaviors that are empirically found to be both psychologically harmful to those who engage in them, and damaging to their relationships (such as suppressing emotions and masking distress) is important. Noting gender differences in frequency/likelihood is helpful.
But why label that “traditional masculinity”? Why lump together positive traits such as risk-taking, protectiveness, and courage, with negative behaviors such as aggression and violence?
Read 12 tweets
3 Oct 18
THREAD: @MoiraWeigel’s review of The Coddling in @Guardian illustrates the very problems we describe in the book. I was chief researcher & in-house editor. We expected some reviewers to cast aspersions rather than use arguments, so we put that in a footnote in ch4. 1/13
The review does not respond to or rebut @glukianoff and @JonHaidt’s core arguments about the 3 Untruths, rising depression/anxiety, or the damaging effects of overprotection and social media. Rather, the central tactic is ad hominem. 2/13
The review indicts them as “white men who hold power” and uses guilt by association and moral pollution to discredit them. For example, some bad people dislike Marcuse & like @nntaleb. @glukianoff and @JonHaidt critique Marcuse & agree with @nntaleb so they must be bad, too. 3/13
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!