Tom Cotton Introduces Bill to Prohibit Federal Funding for Schools Using ‘1619 Project’ Curriculum

Amazon

National Review  . . . The 1619 Project, named after the year when colonists first brought slaves to the U.S., attempts to retell American history by emphasizing the importance of slavery in the country’s earliest years. However, historians have criticized the project for basic “factual errors” and a ” displacement of historical understanding by ideology.” (One example of such an error in the project is the assertion that the colonies revolted from British rule in order to preserve slavery.)
"“The New York Times’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom and equality on which our nation was founded,” Cotton said in a statement. “Not a single cent of federal funding should go to indoctrinate young Americans with this left-wing garbage.”
"According to Cotton, the bill would not affect federal funding allocated to low-income or special-needs students.
"The Times has announced plans to incorporate material from the project in public school curricula. Districts in several major cities including Chicago, Ill., and Washington, D.C., have adopted some of these materials." . . .

Revisionists at it again: The '1619 Project' is bad history fueled by bad motives  "Every decade or so, a new revisionist fad will captivate some small — and invariably loud — subsect of American “historians.” It happened, most memorably, in the 1960s and ‘70s as the rise of Marxist professors swept through our universities. Slowly but surely the grift was seen for what it was — bad history based on bad motives. But a good deal of damage was done, as thousands of university students were indoctrinated to interpret American history as an ongoing drama of class conflict and nothing more. We see the effects of this education playing out today. 
. . . "Neither party cares that the dissemination of their distortion of America’s story will lead, like the teachings of the Marxists of yesteryear, to the weakening of our shared social fabric. " . . .