Factual History To Combat ‘1619 Project’ Cultural Marxism

I’ve said it before and I say it again.  The 1619 Project is a lie from the pit of hell.  It is prostituted one of the most ghastly and hideously loathsome promoters of the continued Marxian objectives of Democrats since their demonic origins.

The 1619 Project was invented by Nikole Hannah-Jones and is based upon what she has openly admitted are lies.  Jones doesn’t hide the fact that her so-called 1619 Project is based wholly on lies.  She Tweeted: “The fight over the 1619 Project is not about [factual] history.  It is about memory.  I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not a history.  It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and, therefore, the national memory.  The project has always been as much about the present as it is the past.”

Maria Buenano wrote: At the heart of nuanced social justice training lies a subset of ideologies most infamously aligned with Critical Race Theory and the Marxist movement. This training is known as the 1619 Project, and the notably Marxist ideologies which support its founding principles would make any well-read scholar write off the project as political doctrine that cannot exist outside the realm of metaphorical fiction. Despite its lack of historical accuracy, the doctrine has been introduced academically and professionally across America.  Jones and the New York Times Magazine changed the founding date of the Untied States of America from July 4, 1776, to August 20, 1619 – the day 20 [allegedly] enslaved Africans first arrived on Virginia soil.  How convenient; if the factual date doesn’t fit your narrative, simply change it to a date that does. (See: The 1619 Project: What It Is and Why You Should Not Let Your Child Read It; Jan. 26, 2020)

The problem with these lies and the malicious attempts to recast factual history is that the purveyors of same can fraudulently change dates, but they cannot change the history on those specific dates.

Jones and her accomplices at the New York Times Magazine cannot change the facts surrounding Anthony Johnson.  In 1651 Anthony Johnson (a so-called black man) owned 250 acres, and the services of four white and one black indentured servants.  The black indentured servant John Casor demanded that Johnson release him after his seven years of indenture.  Johnson refused; a legal battle all the way the State Supreme Court in Northampton, VA, ensued with Johnson prevailing.  Thus, a black man was responsible for slavery. (See: Reminder: The First Legal Slave Owner in America was a Black Man; Jim Hoft; Gateway Pundit; June 17, 2020)

I’d say that severely undermines the fallacious narrative of Hannah-Jones the hebephrenic harridan peddling lies for profit.

Following is the transcript of an interview I had with veteran journalist Jim Simpson on skin color and slavery in America.  It contains a volume of factual and irrefutable historical facts that Hannah-Jones inexplicably missed in her dishonest attempt to promote lies over truth.  See: “Transcript: Jim Simpson of Accuracy In Media Interviews Mychal Massie; February 16, 2015.”

How could even the most incompetent of so-called journalists miss the mark of truth by such a great distance?  Unless of course, they were natural born pernicious liars obsessed with spreading falsehoods.  Then again, such is the history of the New York Times Magazine and those who write for same.

Following is a lengthy and damning article that proves beyond any measure of doubt that the likes of Hannah-Jones and the filth she claims as her supporters are knowingly and purposefully spreading lies: While much progress was made by the Founders to end the institution of slavery, unfortunately what they began was not fully achieved until generations later. Yet, despite the strenuous effort of many Founders to recognize in practice that “all men are created equal,” charges persist to the opposite. In fact, revisionists even claim that the Constitution demonstrates that the Founders considered one who was black to be only three-fifths of a person. This charge is yet another falsehood. The three-fifths clause was not a measurement of human worth; rather, it was an anti-slavery provision to limit the political power of slavery’s proponents. By including only three-fifths of the total number of slaves in the congressional calculations, Southern States were actually being denied additional pro-slavery representatives in Congress. See: SPECIAL EDITION FRIDAY: Facts CRT and Nikole Hannah-Joes’ 1619 Project Want Hidden.

What I have written is not even the tip of the historical facts and truths that Hannah-Jones and those like her want hidden and erased.  That’s because these truths threaten to free the minds of those enslaved on plantations of lies and misinformation intended to further Marxian cultural division.

This division only works when the Hannah-Jones types are able to rewrite and erase factual history.  This is why those such as myself are a threat to Marxian revisionists. It is because they know those such as myself know the truth and are prepared and capable of defending same.

Any teacher and/or school system that supports these lies should be legally held accountable for deliberately and knowingly negatively impacting the future of children with false instruction.