Initial Tweet:

BTW, a WSWS reader informed me of Bouie's tweet. I cannot access his twitter feed because, as I learned earlier today, Bouie has blocked me and other WSWS writers. Intellectual dishonesty and intellectual cowardice are inseparable companions. 7/7 pic.twitter.com/iT6hsyJekm

— David North (@DavidNorthWSWS) December 1, 2021

Response from Randomposter33:

The Nanobureaucracy, rather than respond, simply blocks on Twitter. When the WSWS cannot encourage debate among its own ranks and seeks to get everyone to tow the line on official opinion, that has a freezing effect on all conversation, as described in the #Declaration_of_the_46.

— RandomPoster33 (@RandomPoster33) December 1, 2021

Conversation 1:

David North@DavidNorthWSWS·Dec 1

In response to a favorable reference to Tom Mackaman’s “trenchant critique” of the #1619Project, @jbouie of the NY Times tweeted: “unfortunately i am having a hard time getting through the vitriolic denunciations that punctuate every other sentence” 1/

Buff Coat@freerein·23h

Tom Mackaman’s article is a devastating critique

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·5m

It is a defection from Marxism to liberalism coming right before the emergence of a mass movement of the working class. Changing views of history, Marx would say, themselves have historical and economic roots. Historical change, due to the collapse of capitalism, will give 1/3

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·5m

rise to progressive views of history. That relates to the fact that, despite Mackaman’s lies, not all social forces come from the bourgeoisie. A part come from the rise of oppressed classes and nations who come together in a historical moment to rewrite history politically. 2/3

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·5m

Replying to @RandomPoster33@freereinand 2 others

You will see the attitude of the bureaucracy as represented by Mackaman first in its attitude towards oppressed individuals, then towards nations, and then finally its betrayal of the working class as a whole. 3/3

Conversation 2:

David North@DavidNorthWSWS·Dec 1

In response to a favorable reference to Tom Mackaman’s “trenchant critique” of the #1619Project, @jbouie of the NY Times tweeted: “unfortunately i am having a hard time getting through the vitriolic denunciations that punctuate every other sentence” 1/

Heather Jowsey@HetJowsey

Replying to @DavidNorthWSWS and @jbouie

Jamelle Bouie describes himself as a NYT opinion columnist and a CBS News analyst, with “more juice than Picasso’s got paint.” Perhaps he and Jake Silverstein could use some of that juice to study up on history – you know, what actually happened?

2:00 PM · Dec 1, 2021·Twitter Web App2 Retweets15 Likes

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·23h

Replying to @HetJowsey@DavidNorthWSWS and @jbouie

The real problem is that the WSWS thinks there is no problem. Since the WSWS is not interested in debate or facts but only slander and personal attacks, it should give up on having conversations with respected journalists. They have the resources to defend themselves in court.

Luke Tsarkiller@Luke_Tsarkiller·21h

That is the most absurd, baseless analysis I have ever seen. It would have been faster to just say you didn’t read the article the normal way.

Replying to @RandomPoster33@Luke_Tsarkillerand 3 others

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·1h

The articles states, but does not prove: “the 1619 Project’s main contentions [are]—that slavery was a uniquely American ‘original sin,’ that the American Revolution was launched to defend slavery, that slavery was subsidiary to the Civil War’s true struggle for national unity 1/

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33·1h

among white racists and that ‘anti-black racism’ is a transcendent force that overrides American history.” The 1619 Project highlights with documentation the conscious ruling class policy of dividing the working class using racism, slavery, and extermination of nations. 2/

andomPoster33@RandomPoster33·1h

Replying to @RandomPoster33@Luke_Tsarkillerand 3 others

It abolishes the “Cult of Jefferson” just as Marx wanted the “Cult of Bonaparte” abolished. Marx and Engels worked to expose the Napoleonic Code’s inequity just as the 1619 Project exposes the US Constitution. This shifts responsibility to the WSWS to expose its own hypocrisy.3/3

Conversation 3:

David North@DavidNorthWSWS·Dec 1

In response to a favorable reference to Tom Mackaman’s “trenchant critique” of the #1619Project, @jbouie of the NY Times tweeted: “unfortunately i am having a hard time getting through the vitriolic denunciations that punctuate every other sentence” 1/

Heather Jowsey@HetJowsey·Dec 1

Perhaps the NY Times reporters, used to proceeding upon subjective “narrative” and not facts, have difficulty reading through precise and detailed historical analyses. Enter Jake Silverstein, with the ever-changing “narrative”, and now J Bouie.

RandomPoster33@RandomPoster33

Replying to @HetJowsey@DavidNorthWSWS and @jbouie

Mackaman’s opposition to Beard and the Progressive Historians is revealing. His Engels quote contradicts his entire slanderous argument against Beard. They “overlap.” James Burnham and conservatism overlap with Trotskyism. Has Mackaman disproved Trotskyism? Only in his own mind.