There is nothing about the New York Times - or New York - that I can think of to recommend. They are up to mischief always.
That said, I'm not sure that Lincoln was “fighting to free the slaves.” If there is information to support the claim that he was, I'd like to read it.
Agreed, however,
although Lincoln was not “fighting to free the slaves’, EVERYONE knows that is Exactly what the Civil War was about.
Do you deny this ?!
And NYT project 1619 is entirely to paint the United States as evil at its founding.
Try reading about the Lincoln Douglas Debates, held even before Lincoln became president. Lincoln was an abolitionist far earlier and was an early member of the Republican Party which was founded on the premise of ending slavery and preventing its expansion into the territories.
The claim that he was not opposed to slavery comes from his statement that “If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it” is taken out of context. Lincoln preferred that Congress would pass a Constitutional Amendment toward that end and all the states would ratify it. The Emancipation Proclamation did, in fact, free no slaves, because it freed only those slaves over which Lincoln no longer had jurisdiction, those now in the states in open rebellion against the United States which had declared themselves to be a new Nation: The Confederate States of America. It was THAT which he was talking about.
What Lincoln preferred did later come about.
As I said, read the texts of the Lincoln Douglas Debates.