I know people have posted links to where some were taught slavery wasn’t that big a deal or slaves accepted it but just as false as those things are saying what 1619 project says which is United States was founded out of fear Britain was going to abolish slavery soon. Seems like mostly everyone was taught slavery was mostly economic and not social and certainly didn’t create barriers that still exist today! Now what people want to teach is that slavery was almost more about White supremacy rather than economics. And that the white supremacy that created slavery just was morphed into different forms of slavery after slavery was abolished! And you can argue some ways it was like with sharecropping and Jim Crow but really it was not all the same.This article discusses how John Marshall, influential early Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, was a dedicated slaveowner, buying up to 300 slaves during his life, and how this likely influenced his judicial opinions on issues relating to slavery and Native Americans:
John Marshall not only owned people; he owned many of them, and aggressively bought them when he could.www.theatlantic.com
When you read a story like this, it becomes hard to argue that slavery isn't intrinsic to the founding experience of the U.S. Certainly it was interwoven into the story from the beginning. The teaching of U.S. history has to acknowledge that. If it doesn't, it's selling a false narrative.