History

I enjoy reading different perspectives from historians. I learned this as an undergrad at Amherst. Oddly, in grad school, I came across several instructors who refused to consider alternative viewpoints regarding historical events. In my own teaching I still hold and teach some views that fly in the face of what textbooks and even other instructors at my college(s) teach. I tell students that I might be wrong, but I do present the evidence in my favor and let them decide for themselves--if they even care. Yet, different perspectives does not mean distorting, lying, or even just making up things. I've been thinking about this for some time and the past few weeks have illuminated this. That's what seems to be happening today. People make up history, distort it, or just plain tell lies. How do they get away with this, often without challenges? I know the old adage, "The winners of the war write the history." Adolf Hitler, among others, knew it, too. Upon the September 1, 1939 invasion of Poland that began The Second World War, Hitler ordered German prisoners to be taken from their jail cells out to the Polish frontier, just inside German territory. These prisoners were dressed in Polish military uniforms and then shot. Photographs were taken of these faux Polish soldiers, in Germany, to prove Hitler/Germany didn't start the war--Poland did by invading Germany. He fully intended to win the war and write its history, with the photos proof that he didn't start it. If not quite as dramatic, today we face similar attempts to manipulate history with distortion, lies, and even ignorance. Faux history is utilized to justify/rationalize agendas and policies, to convince people to support them. I suppose these users (abusers) of history are ignorant of it, but I much more strongly suspect they are dishonest, deliberately trying to deceive through lies. Equally disturbing is that so many Americans are so ignorant that they are easily manipulated by the deception and that the deceivers are not called out by, say, the main stream media. Although there are many examples, two current ones come to mind. President Biden has repeated incredible, as in unbelievable, statements, especially regarding states' voter reform laws and the January 6th events. I don't know if he's that ignorant or is deliberate in spreading history that isn't so. Perhaps it's both. Biden likened those proposed state laws regarding election reform to "21st Century Jim Crow," those proposals being the greatest threat to American democracy "since the Civil War." With full discount for political hyperbole, he and those who echo such hogwash demonstrate either remarkable ignorance (I really want to start using the word "stupidity.") or deliberate dishonesty. That the fiasco of January 6th at the Capitol was a greater threat to the existence of the United States than the Confederacy is just plain idiotic. "The Confederates never breached the Capitol," he noted. But, he added, "the insurrectionists did on January 6th." These "insurrectionists" were led by Viking Helmet Man, not Robert E. Lee with his almost 100,000 strong Army of Northern Virginia. Does Biden even know what Jim Crow Laws were? I suspect not. If he did, he could never equate them with proposals to prevent ballot harvesting, to require voter identification, or to remove ineligible voters from election rolls. But if he (and others who echo this foolishness) does know, that means he (and they) is (are) deliberately lying, using the Big Lie to frighten/alarm people when there is little reason to be frightened/alarmed. A few columnists and even a member or two of the DC press corps have been challenging Biden about some of his outrageous comments. But not enugh people are. Can you imagine the front-page or "breaking news" outrage had President Trump made the same claims? Similarly, an article in the Wall Street Journal was sent to me by a college buddy. He knows how much I enjoy history and reading other historians' views of it, especially alternative explanations and interpretations. Just coincidentally, the article was based on an interview of Walter McDougall, a historian who was three years ahead of me at Amherst. I am pretty sure we didn't cross paths, but the interview suggests to me that we had many of the same history professors and their teaching of historical analysis. The article was titled, "The 'Hustlers' Who Started America." It looked at the Founders, their achievements and motives. I enjoyed the interview and will perhaps later explore its main thrust. McDougall sounds like a wonderful historian and I have put a couple of his books on my reading list. But what also caught my attention was his view of the wokesters, how they are manipulating history like Biden and his ilk. Perhaps I am wrong, but I took him to mean the 1619 Project and its New York Times advocates, Black Lives Matter and its supporters, and even college professors who should know better. Their motives are clear, even if their means are obfuscated. Regarding intellectual honesty/responsibility, something we were taught at Amherst, McDougall asked, more of a statement than a question, "How can anyone believe this country does not have any ideals or at least any ideals worth striving for?" He adds, critically, "The woke either don't know how to think historically or they don't want to think historically." I think this aligns with my views of Biden and his fellow Democrats. The "either/or" is damning. That there are so many people who seem to have been taken in by Biden, the Democrats, the lame stream media, and even college professors, who've joined the woke crowd, is frightening. The distortion and manipulation of history continues. And yet, in our schools, the study of history more and more has been relegated to a back seat.