Let's be honest: The 1619 Project was a propaganda effort that backfired. A bunch of faux-intellectual media hacks thought they'd push their usual bullshit but with a historic twist. Unfortunately, actual historians weren't willing to go along. And they spoke out.

It was an unintentional demonstration of how much of a bubble the media hacks live in. They never bothered to consider the hard academic work of progressive historians and never imagined those historians would undermine their bullshit claims. They're a bubble within a bubble.

They're so shamelessly in the tank for whatever fact-free, political bullshit they decide to push each day, that they never truly thought that serious academics would point out their bullshit. Why would they. Surely, like the media, the lefty academics would just play along.

This is what happens when hacks run up against people who may often agree with them politically but who have actual beliefs and convictions. And who aren't just going to rubber-stamp some hack's bullcrap in the name of ideological solidarity.

We don't have a bunch of those people in politics or media. They're not universal but they're a lot more common in academia. Where leftist academics regularly have debates among themselves about esoteric issues. And now factor-in that these people have strong beliefs about

some shit from 200/300/400 years ago. People who've built careers and reputations and spent decades of their lives studying niche topics. You were bound to find a few who weren't going to go along with whatever the hack creative writer from the NYT wrote about their subjects.