Acton Line


Critiquing the 1619 Project with Phil Magness

Ep. 240

Since debuting in the New York Times Magazine on August 14, 2019, the 1619 Project has ignited a debate about American history, the founding of the country and the legacy emanating from the nation’s history with chattel slavery.

The project’s creator and editor, Nikole Hannah-Jones, has described the project as seeking to place “the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.” Components of a related school curriculum have been adopted in major cities like Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Buffalo, New York. For her work on the project, Hannah-Jones was awarded the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.

But the project has also come in for heavy criticism from historians and economists of all political and philosophical persuasions for inaccuracies in "matters of verifiable fact” in history and economics. In response to these critics, Hannah-Jones just recently declared the project not a work history, but instead a work of journalism.

One of the project’s most frequent critics is Phil Magness, Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.

On this episode, Phil Magness discusses the objectives of the 1619 project, the economic history of slavery, the project’s historical errors and why many Americans seem to have such a difficult time accepting the complicated totality of our own history.

Phillip W. Magness at the American Institute for Economic Research

The 1619 Project - The New York Times Magazine

The 1619 Project: A Critique - Phil Magness

Public Schools Are Teaching The 1619 Project in Class, Despite Concerns From Historians - Reason

Karl Marx: Intellectual father of the 1619 Project? - Rev. Ben Johnson

The 1619 Projection: 3 lies Pulitzer should not reward - Rev. Ben Johnson

More Episodes


Using social media for good with Daniel Darling

Ep. 244
On February 4th, 2004, a sophomore at Harvard University by the name of Mark Zuckerberg launched TheFacebook. At the time, the social networking website was limited to only students at Harvard. And while other social networking platforms like MySpace and Friendster predated the launch of Facebook, it was that February day in Cambridge, Massachusetts that the age of social media was truly born.Today, Facebook boasts 2.5 billion active users, is available in 111 languages, and is the 4th most trafficked website in the world. And from there, other platforms followed: Twitter, Instagram, SnapChat, Pintrest and, most recently, TikTok.While these platforms were launched with a promise of connecting the entire world together in conversation, today they also have a reputation for fostering hate, animosity, vitriol, conspiracy mongering, outrage mobs and a litany of other negative societal impacts.Does social media have to be this way? Or can we be better?In this episode, Daniel Darling, Senior Vice President for Communications at National Religious Broadcasters and author of the new book A Way With Words, discusses the promise of social media, where it went wrong, what our social media habits say about us, and how we can use our online conversations for good.Daniel Darling's websiteThe Way Home Podcast with Daniel DarlingA Way with Words: Using Our Online Conversations for Good - Daniel DarlingA Time to Build: From Family and Community to Congress and the Campus, How Recommitting to Our Institutions Can Revive the American Dream - Yuval LevinIs social media the source of our social problems? - Dan HuggerHow to drain the poison of outrage out of social media - Dan HuggerReligion & Liberty Winter 2019: Social Media

COVID-19 pandemic economics with Dr. David Hebert

Ep. 243
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 has brought with it enormous costs. These include, first and foremost, an enormous cost in the terms of human life, with more than 178,000 deaths from the coronavirus in the United States alone, and at least 814,000 deaths worldwide, as of late August 2020. But also, with the pandemic have come significant economic costs, fiscal costs, and personal costs to our happiness and quality of life.Why is living under quarantine so hard for people? In large part it’s because, prior to the pandemic, many people have enjoyed living under a system of mostly-free markets. But when we’re robbed of our ability to work in a lockdown, we’re also robbed of part of what comprises our innate human dignity, as this pandemic takes a toll not only in the loss of human life but in the loss of community.What can we learn from the economic cost of the coronavirus pandemic? How can economics and public choice theory help us better understand the actions of political leaders during this time? And how can entrepreneurship allowed for under free market systems innovate solutions to these problems?In this episode, Acton’s managing director of programs Stephen Barrows speaks with Dr. David Hebert, chair of the economics department and associate professor of economics at Aquinas College, about the economics of the quarantines and lock-downs in the Covid-19.Dr. David Hebert at Aquinas CollegeWhy quarantine is no fun, part 1 (video) - Dr. David HebertWhy quarantine is no fun, part 2 (video) - Dr. David HebertPen and Paper EconomicsCreativity will kill COVID-19 - Anne Rathbone BradleyRev. Robert Sirico on the church's response to COVID-19 - Acton LineA free-market agenda for rebuilding from the coronavirus - Henrik Rasmussen