1619 Project wants to cancel America

Nathan Williamson

ARLINGTON, Va. — As the New York Times “revisits” its controversial 1619 Project amid growing criticism, one story has largely avoided the media’s attention: What it’s founder — “journalist” Nikole Hannah-Jones — wants to replace America with.

For some background, the 1619 Project seeks to redefine American history as systemically racist, built purely on the reprehensible institution of slavery. This effort is designed to undermine public faith in the goodness of American society.

And Hannah-Jones has not been quiet about her far-left goals. As she told PBS regarding 1619:

“We have a story about why we’re the only Western industrial country without universal health care, about why Americans consume so much sugar, about capitalism, about democracy. We’re really trying to change the way that Americans are thinking …”

Hannah-Jones then expressed her contempt for America, alleging that if not for slavery, we could’ve been the leftist paradise of Canada (of course, she ignores Canada’s past issues with institutionalized slavery).

Statements like Hannah-Jones’s on 1619 bring to mind the warning of Claremont Institute Chairman Thomas Klingenstein, who also recently delivered a viral speech on this topic:

“[1619’s] version of American history teaches us that we are unworthy — not just that we have sinned (which of course we have) but that we are irredeemably sinful.”

He summarized it thus: “In a sentence, the 1619 Project teaches that America — its values, customs, and institutions — is evil.”

Klingenstein correctly calls out far-left radicals looking to overthrow the American way of life. Given 1619’s desire to cancel America, it’s valuable to read Hannah-Jones’s past writing to discern how she wants America to look.

In 2008, writing for The Oregonian, Hannah-Jones praised Fidel Castro’s Cuba — exalting what “the revolution” accomplished “through socialism.”

She delivered strange applause for Cuba’s “press freedom,” stating: “We journalists had a great deal of freedom to travel through Havana — no handlers, no monitors. We could see that Cuba is not the great evil we are led to believe.”

This despite Cuba consistently being ranked among the worst violators of press freedom (currently among such pro-journalist nations as China and North Korea).

In fact, a report on Cuba’s violations of press freedom pointed out Cuba’s abuse of journalists, also reading in part: “It is striking to note that there were some 2,000 newspaper professionals in Cuba in 1959 and that only three years later, 1,500 had fled.”

And despite well-documented human rights abuses in the Cuban health care system (including segregation of HIV positive citizens and possible forced abortions), Hannah-Jones celebrated it as a “world model.”

Meanwhile, the system has been called out for delivering “a deceiving performance” in critical treatment areas, per a 2018 Oxford Academic article Still, Hannah-Jones wrote:

“While there, I found a Cuba you may not know. A Cuba with a 99.8 percent literacy rate, the lowest HIV infection rate in the Western Hemisphere, free college and health care.”

It seems Hannah-Jones’s ultimate goal is to make America more like a socialist dictatorship. That’s not particularly shocking though, considering a major funder of the Ida B. Wells Society (an organization Hannah-Jones founded) is George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

Soros himself has spent tens of millions of dollars on far-left causes to radically change America.

He’s voiced his disdain for America, stating: “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States” and calling capitalism itself “the main enemy of the open society.” The fact that Hannah-Jones has cozied up to his cash should concern Americans everywhere.

Given her anti-American past, it’s no wonder she told Essence that “I’ve always written about the worst side of America.” The 1619 Project is simply an extension of that work.

The fact is Americans are still overwhelmingly proud of this nation and the steady progress we’ve made in expanding individual rights. But Hannah-Jones’s 1619 Project aims to force the radical view that America is broken at its core.

If we are to preserve our great country, we must forcefully reject the anti-American agenda that 1619 promotes.

Nathan Williamson is a conservative activist and writer. His op-eds have been featured in publications including the Washington Examiner, Issues & Insights, and RealClearMarkets. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Johnson Newspapers 7.1


Recommended for you

(16) comments


We can recognize America's sordid past, and that there are many working hard to go back to it, without ignoring the fact that there's also a lot of idealism and progress. The way to refute the assertions of the 1619 project is to not prove its truth all the time. Please stop people. This is pointless. It was bad, so much that went on and still does. We don't make it better by ignoring that or pretending wrong is right.


There’s no real critique of Hannah-Jones’ work. It’s all just ad hominem attacks on her and he even quotes attacks by a professor. It’s laughable that this guy is attacking Cuba for press freedom. Cuba should be called out. I’m sure this is an ardent Trump supporter. Does he have any words to spare for Trump’s undermining of a free press in this country? Or of Trump’s friends Putin and MBS and their silencing of journalists by murder?

If what’s written in the Times’ piece can be refuted then do so. You don’t refute it by accusing the author of something they said about Cuba or of ties to Soros who btw deserves praise for his commitment to democracy around the world.


Critiquing the author was his intent, Kr. If you would improve your reading comprehension, you would notice that. (Your comment to me in a previous post). Also, after all your criticisms of the orange one, I can't believe you are lauding the twice divorced Soros.


Critiquing the author was his intent

Ad hom attacks are not critiques.

hermit thrush

this is one of the worst columns i have ever seen printed in this newspaper.


I agree. It's full of inaccuracies and decontextualized assertions.


OK, I'll bite. What are the inaccuracies and decontextualized assertions?

hermit thrush

the first thing to do is to read jones's lead essay in the package for yourself, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html. it's one of the most important essays of the past few years and every patriotic american should make a point of reading it independently of any discussions around this particular column.


Very well written article. I realize they were different times, but you can’t look back on it and not think it wasn’t evil and hypocritical to write the words of the Declaration of Independence and at the same time treat other humans like animals or worse.


I say again... what are the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, hermit? I have two masters degrees already so I don't do homework for wannabe college professors.

hermit thrush

the headline is a lie. the idea that anyone wants to "cancel" anything is pure brain-dead provocation.

the 1619 project does not seek to "redefine" american history as systemically racist. the charge that it sees our history as built "purely" on slavery is ignorant, bad-faith hogwash. what it does do is to show that slavery and anti-black racism are central forces in american history, albeit not to the exclusion of other central forces (such as our founding ideals). the point is that slavery and anti-black racism are more important than much of american culture gives them credit for.

the 1619 project is not "designed" to undermine public faith in the goodness of american society. that is the kind of claim that only ends up telling on yourself -- incredible snowflakiness and grievance. nikole hannah-jones's lead essay is a beautiful testament to black americans' fervent patiotism and belief in the ideals of our country despite the awful legacy of treatment they have received. philip klein, a conservative writer at the washington examiner, had a nice column about this when the package first came out: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/how-slavery-doomed-limited-government-in-america.

that's just from the headline and a single paragraph.


Methinks hermit disagrees with the column, therefore its "one of the worst".

hermit thrush

it is one of the worst because it is full of lies. it is pure propaganda. i see no evidence that the author has actually read anything from the package. have you?


Exactly. I don't necessarily support the full context but the goal of the project is accurately depicted. I think everyone knows the shortcomings of Cuba and Canada. We are fine. Crazed extremists like the 1619 project will never take a foothold but we have this wonderful freedom of speech thing that allows such talk. Seems to be forgot sometimes...particularly if you don't agree with Mr. Hermit lol

hermit thrush

airball, you are perfectly free to spread your bad takes, just as i am perfectly free to call them bad. please don't be such a snowflake to to mistake criticism or disagreement for anyone infringing on your rights.


It reads like something Alex Jones would write—if he knew how.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.