You don’t get to decide the definitions of terms. Historical revisionism is BY DEFINITION the reinterpretation of history. Which as you have admitted, is exactly what 1619 is doing. Therefore 1619 is historical revisionism.

If you dare to say that 1619 is wrong, you get tagged with the “racist” term like you just did to me. Even though I’m a liberal that calls out bullshit when I see it.