Nikole Hannah-Jones

Historian James Oakes offers a critique of the New History of Capitalism.

The Great Emancipator's character and anti-slavery legacy has been questioned by Black Americans for over a century.

The United States didn't begin in 1619.

Critics of the New York Times’s 1619 Project obscure a longstanding debate among historians over whether the American Revolution was a proslavery revolt.

Sean Wilentz wrote a piece opposing the New York Times Magazine's 1619 Project, but his use of Revolutionary-era newspapers as sources is flawed.

Martin Luther King Jr. recognized that Imperial expansion over stolen Indian land shaped and deepened the American Revolution’s relationship to slavery.

The 1619 Project offers bitterness, fragility, and intellectual corruption—not history.

What 1619 has become to the history of American slavery, 1688 is to the history of American antislavery.

The New York Times’ series on slavery relies on bad scholarship to make an argument with an inauspicious history.

It made it impossible to limit the size and scope of the federal government. Conservatives need to recognize that.

Conservative uproar over the 1619 Project is just the most recent clash in a battle over how we should understand America’s past.

A collection of resources challenging the notion that the U.S. was built on nothing but injustice and subjugation.