An objection to the 1619 Project on the grounds that it does not focus enough on the roles of...
... "courageous whites" is an ideological objection, not a factual or historical one.
https://www.theassemblync.com/long-form/nikole-hannah-jones-a-mega-donor-and-the-future-of-journalism/
In a September email, Hussman, who is white, took issue with a section of Hannah-Jones’ 1619 essay on the country’s post-World War II struggle for civil rights, in which she wrote, “For the most part, black Americans fought back alone.”
Hussman wrote: “I think this claim denigrates the courageous efforts of many white Americans to address the sin of slavery and the racial injustices that resulted after the Civil War.” He listed white Freedom Riders and other whites who had fought for equality, including journalists across the South. The email was sent to Routh and copied to Guskiewicz and King.
“Long before Nikole Hannah Jones won her Pulitzer Prize,” Hussman wrote, “courageous white southerners risking their lives standing up for the rights of blacks were winning Pulitzer prizes, too.”
Despite Hussman’s concerns, King continued to pursue Hannah-Jones. After a lengthy faculty and administrative process recommended tenure, Board of Trustees member Chuck Duckett raised questions and asked for more time to get answers. The university instead offered a five-year, fixed-term appointment—without tenure—to Hannah-Jones.
In an interview with The Assembly, Hussman declined to address his communication with UNC-CH officials about Hannah-Jones. He said he still considered himself a working journalist and was bound by his company’s code of ethics, which prevents newsroom employees from publicly taking sides in contentious matters.
Hannah-Jones' claim that black Americans "fought alone" for their rights most of the time is open to interpretation but it's more than defensible; it's also one of the claims people are *most* offended by.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians-clash-1619-project/604093/