Explain the two reasoning given in the article for and against the 1619 Project. Think about why people support it and why they are against it. Which side do you support and why?

This question calls for your opinion.

Although, I do not know what article you are referring to, I take the author's own words to be the best reflection, as she admits herself.... the project is no more than an "origin story", a work of literature, a work of fiction. So, the question would be, do you think that the 1619 project should be implemented as a history lesson? Should "historically based fiction" be taught as history?

New York Times magazine staffer Nikole Hannah-Jones claimed this week that her infamous 1619 Project is not actually a work of history, but rather an “origin story.”