This is long, but quite satisfying, and for the casual but informed reader of history who wondered how the #1619Project could possibly push back against the "factual" critiques of eminent Princeton historians such as @seanwilentz, here's your answer. https://newrepublic.com/article/160995/consensus-approach-history
It's also just a good explanation of how historiography works and that objectivity, in historiography, in journalism, is rarely -- maybe never -- a real thing.