This line is one of the odder falsehoods in the 1619 Project book. Not only is it wrong - there's no evidence that Lincoln abandoned colonization - but Nikole Hannah-Jones once knew as much.
She changed her position though because it previously rested on my scholarship.
In the months after the 1619 Project came out, NHJ repeatedly cited my work to show that Lincoln never abandoned colonization.
Then she realized I was the author, despite being a 1619 Project critic.
A passage on the next page unintentionally reveals the historical ignorance of the 1619 Project writers. It is true that most African-Americans rejected colonization, but NHJ uses two very odd choices to make that case: W.E.B. Du Bois and Martin Delany
Du Bois is an odd choice because he famously left the US & relocated to Ghana at the end of his life, dying there in 1963.
Delany was a black abolitionist, but also an advocate of resettlement in Liberia both before and after the Civil War. In 1878 he organized this company:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Also going to save this for when the American Postliberals (and their Budapest auxiliary) inevitably try to construct a new genealogy for themselves by latching onto older movements that also share the postliberal label by coincidence.
"The rise in anti-Semitism on the right is attributable to a handful of individuals whom Hazony is too cowardly and embarrassed to condemn. Like a vengeful alcoholic at an intervention, he is lashing out and blaming everyone but himself for the wreckage he helped create" commentary.org/articles/james…
Also note: the picture of Hazony in the banner image is from him speaking at an event cosponsored by MCC, aka Viktor Orban University.
I first encountered Hazony ca. 2018 at a dinner sponsored by ISI where he gave a talk on his book. His lecture was vapid nationalist slop that made multiple egregiously erroneous claims about American history and political philosophy.
I remember sitting there shocked that anyone could find this guy even remotely convincing - not because the message was bad (and it was) but because his arguments betrayed utter incompetence with the subject matter. I was not the only one who thought so either. Most of the others at my table were rolling their eyes at him, and whispering about his mistakes in the speech.
When Q&A opened up, I started to raise my hand to push back on some of his claims. George Gilder, who was sitting right behind me, raised his hand at the same time. They called on Gilder, and he proceeded to make some of the same criticisms of Hazony that were going around my table. Hazony's answer to the challenge amounted to meandering babble and evasion.
I didn't think much else about Hazony after that, until he resurfaced as the leader of this NatCon thing. I was not at all surprised when I read the speaker list, and saw it was an eclectic mix of bigots, cranks, and conspiracy theorists. More surprising though is that Hazony has been pushing the same bigots for the last 6+ years now, all the while feigning "shock" that they spew bigotry whenever it spills into public view...and then turning around the next day and inviting the very same bigots back to his conferences.
Earlier today, President Trump made a last ditch attempt to salvage his tariffs before the Supreme Court by claiming that it would be impossible to refund them.
There's a problem. Trump's own DOJ has been admitting in court filings for months that refunds are possible.🧵
Here's the Trump DOJ's initial response on April 29, 2025, admitting that if they lost an unappealable decision, the government would refund the illegal tariffs with interest.
On May 28, 2025 the Trump DOJ filed a motion for a stay of the US Court of International Trade's ruling against them, arguing that the tariffs could be refunded with interest.
The court granted their stay based on this promise.
10 things to listen for in tomorrow's SCOTUS hearing on tariffs:
1. Will the DOJ try to argue that tariffs are not taxes, but regulatory "surcharges" under the international commerce clause out of the hope that this gives them more leeway under delegation of congressional power?
2. Will Roberts accept a "tariffs are not taxes, they're regulations" argument from Trump in light of his (in)famous Obamacare tax argument from Sebelius?
3. Will Kagan clarify her position on when the nondelegation doctrine applies by suggesting that tariffs fit that constitutional test, whereas other cases where she rejected it did not?
In 2016 the @AAUP launched a campaign urging colleges to ban conservative students from recording professors in the classroom.
I FOIA'd emails of Hank Reichman, their VP at the time & author of the policy. It revealed he was working with a Marxist group to secretly record free-market economics faculty at a conference he disliked.
The AAUP has always been a coven of left wing partisan hacks and hypocrites.
@AAUP For those who asked, here is the policy recommendation adopted by Reichman's committee.
@AAUP There are several FOIA'd emails, but here I'll share some of the main documents. Here is the Marxist student group coordinating behind the scenes with Reichman to promote their recordings of economics professors at the conference.