How should History be taught in a Global society?

Changing History
The Nation
Eric Foner

All history, the saying goes, is contemporary history. People instinctively turn to the past to help understand the present. Events draw our attention to previously neglected historical subjects. The second wave of feminism gave birth to a flourishing subfield of women's history. The Reagan Revolution spawned a cottage industry in the history of US conservatism.

Many years will pass before we can fully assess how our thinking about history has changed as a result of September 11. While historians ponder this question, conservative ideologues have produced a spate of polemical statements on how we should teach American history in light of recent events. In a speech less than a month after the tragedy, Lynne Cheney insisted that calls for more intensive study of the rest of the world amounted to blaming America's "failure to understand Islam" for the attack. A letter distributed by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, which she once chaired, chastised professors who fail to teach the "truth" that civilization itself "is best exemplified in the West and indeed in America."

In What's So Great About America, Dinesh D'Souza contends that freedom and religious toleration are uniquely "Western" beliefs. The publisher's ad for the book identifies those who hold alternative views as "people who provide a rationale for terrorism." With funding from conservative foundations and powerful political connections, such commentators hope to reshape the teaching of American history.

Historians cannot predict the future, but the past they portray must be one out of which the present can plausibly have grown. The self-absorbed, super-celebratory history now being promoted will not enable students to make sense of either their own society or our increasingly interconnected world.

Historians cannot choose the ways history becomes part of our own experience. September 11 has rudely placed certain issues at the forefront of our consciousness. Let me mention three and their implications for how we think about the American past: the upsurge of patriotism, significant infringements on civil liberties and a sudden awareness of considerable distrust abroad of American actions and motives.

The generation of historians that came of age during the Vietnam War witnessed firsthand how patriotic language and symbols, especially the American flag, can be invoked in the service of manifestly unjust causes. Partly as a result, they have tended to neglect the power of these symbols as genuine expressions of a sense of common national community. Patriotism, if studied at all, has been understood as an "invention," rather than a habit of the heart.

Historians have had greater success lately at dividing up the American past into discrete experiences delineated along lines of race, ethnicity, gender and class than at exploring the common threads of American nationality. But the immediate response to September 11 cut across these boundaries. No one knows if the renewed sense of common purpose and shared national identity that surfaced so vividly after September 11 will prove temporary. But they require historians to devote new attention to the roots of the symbols, values and experiences Americans share as well as those that divide them.

All patriotic upsurges run the risk of degenerating into a coercive drawing of boundaries between "loyal" Americans and those stigmatized as aliens and traitors. This magazine has chronicled the numerous and disturbing infringements on civil liberties that have followed September 11. Such legal protections as habeas corpus, trial by impartial jury, the right to legal representation and equality before the law regardless of race or national origin have been seriously curtailed.

Civil liberties have been severely abridged during previous moments of crisis, from the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 to Japanese-American internment in World War II. Historians generally view these past episodes as shameful anomalies. But we are now living through another such episode, and there is a remarkable absence of public outcry.

We need an American history that sees protections for civil liberties not as a timeless feature of our "civilization" but as a recent and fragile achievement resulting from many decades of historical struggle. We should take a new look at obscure Supreme Court cases--Fong Yue Ting (1893), the Insular Cases of the early twentieth century, Korematsu during World War II--in which the Justices allowed the government virtual carte blanche in dealing with aliens and in suspending the rights of specific groups of citizens on grounds of military necessity. Dissenting in Fong Yue Ting, which authorized the deportation of Chinese immigrants without due process, Justice David Brewer observed that, like today, the power was directed against a people many Americans found "obnoxious." But, he warned, "who shall say it will not be exercised tomorrow against other classes and other people?"

September 11 will also undoubtedly lead historians to examine more closely the history of the country's relationship with the larger world. Public opinion polls revealed that few Americans have any knowledge of other peoples' grievances against the United States. A study of our history in its international context might help to explain why there is widespread fear outside our borders that the war on terrorism is motivated in part by the desire to impose a Pax Americana in a grossly unequal world.

Back in the 1930s, historian Herbert Bolton warned that by treating the American past in isolation, historians were helping to raise up a "nation of chauvinists"--a danger worth remembering when considering the drumbeat of calls for a celebratory and insular history divorced from its global context. Of course, international paradigms can be every bit as obfuscating as histories that are purely national. We must be careful not to reproduce traditional American exceptionalism on a global scale.

September 11, for example, has inspired a spate of commentary influenced by Samuel Huntington's mid-1990s book The Clash of Civilizations. Huntington's paradigm reduces politics and culture to a single characteristic--race, religion or geography--that remains forever static, divorced from historical development or change through interaction with other societies. It makes it impossible to discuss divisions within these purported civilizations. The idea that the West is the sole home of reason, liberty and tolerance ignores how recently such values triumphed in the United States and also ignores the debates over creationism, abortion rights and other issues that suggest that commitment to them is hardly unanimous. The definition of "Western civilization" is highly selective--it includes the Enlightenment but not the Inquisition, liberalism but not the Holocaust, Charles Darwin but not the Salem witch trials.

Nor can September 11 be explained by reference to timeless characteristics or innate pathologies of "Islamic civilization." From the Ku Klux Klan during Reconstruction to Oklahoma City in our own time, our society has produced its own home-grown terrorists. Terrorism springs from specific historical causes, not the innate qualities of one or another civilization.

The study of history should transcend boundaries rather than reinforce or reproduce them. In the wake of September 11, it is all the more imperative that the history we teach be a candid appraisal of our own society's strengths and weaknesses, not simply an exercise in self-celebration--a conversation with the entire world, not a complacent dialogue with ourselves.

Odd that a topic containing the words "global society" has its main focus on the U.S. society.

It was my understanding that we are a failing superpower on the brink of collapse anyway, so how we percieve and teach history going forward is moot. :inquisitive:

Nice bit of societal bashing though, but hey, I never bought into the "global society" BS anyway. Nationalism has its roots firmly in place all over the world (EU constitution anyone?), and the romantic ideas of a global community are just that, left to authors who desire a utopia that is based on nothing more then themselves standing on a pulpit preaching to the congregation they have created in thier mind.

A discussion on the statistical output of fecal matter by nation would be a wonderful comparative article.

:thumbsdown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

Nice bit of societal bashing though, but hey, I never bought into the "global society" BS anyway. Nationalism has its roots firmly in place all over the world (EU constitution anyone?), and the romantic ideas of a global community are just that, left to authors who desire a utopia that is based on nothing more then themselves standing on a pulpit preaching to the congregation they have created in thier mind.

---

Until about 60 years ago you could have said the same about peace in Europe.
Also don't underestimate the internet, I already have a global community and you're part of it, whether you want or not. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Until about 60 years ago you could have said the same about peace in Europe.
Also don't underestimate the internet, I already have a global community and you're part of it, whether you want or not. ~;)

---

bah, how about we compare feces output instead?

Quote:

---

bah, how about we compare feces output instead?

---

What's that supposed to mean?

Whether you like it or not we live in a global community, not some one world government peace on Earth crap, but a world were you are forced to deal with people all over the world. Two dorm rooms down from me is a Chinese student named Roy, I'm going to bet the clothes you are wearing weren't made in the country you live in, etc. Actions in one nation affect all others now.

Maybe you think the folks next door don't matter as much as you do, Odin, but it doesn't alter the fact that you have neighbours -- and we're all depositing our faecal matter in the same backyard. That makes it a global community, even if you want to be the odd guy at the end of the street with his curtains closed all day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBob

What's that supposed to mean?

---

What do you think it means genius?

Quote:

---

Whether you like it or not we live in a global community, not some one world government peace on Earth crap, but a world were you are forced to deal with people all over the world.

---

No kidding really?

Quote:

---

Two dorm rooms down from me is a Chinese student named Roy, I'm going to bet the clothes you are wearing weren't made in the country you live in, etc.

---

Yes, im sure the history lessons of the future will be ripe with example of how the imperialist declining US society fell to an economic chinese jugernaut that is primary growth sourse is manufacturing revenue based on said US consumption.

Quote:

---

Actions in one nation affect all others now.

---

Brilliance, alas this dosent negate the fact the article is written from a perspective of how the US should be teaching history in the authors interpretation of a global society. It also dosent negate the notion of nationalism which is firmly routed all over the world (want to bet on that one too sport?) and that global societies as presented here are a long, long way off.

Of course Gene Roddenberry was right about the cell phone, so who knows maybe the starship enterprise will be bravely going where no man has gone before, bespeckled of course with all ethnicities represented from one singular community called earth....

:gathering:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

Maybe you think the folks next door don't matter as much as you do, Odin, but it doesn't alter the fact that you have neighbours -- and we're all depositing our faecal matter in the same backyard.

---

Who talking abotu next door? This article is about a global society, and in that sense i dont give a dam what the hell you do in your country or how you teach your history.

Quote:

---

That makes it a global community, even if you want to be the odd guy at the end of the street with his curtains closed all day.

---

Or better yet I could be like you, the guy at the top of the street on the soap box telling everyone else how they should be thinking and how they should be teaching thier history.

Quote:

---

Who talking abotu next door? This article is about a global society, and in that sense i dont give a dam what the hell you do in your country or how you teach your history.

---

Right, so you're one of the guys who says "Maybe Iran calls America the Great Satan and teaching how we've :daisy:ed them over, let it go, my fellow Americans."??

Quote:

---

the guy at the top of the street on the soap box telling everyone else how they should be thinking and how they should be teaching thier history

---

AFAIK "The Nation" is a US publication, the end of the street is a little closer to you than I am...

But, true, if I see I a liar, I'll call him on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

Right, so you're one of the guys who says "Maybe Iran calls America the Great Satan and teaching how we've :daisy:ed them over, let it go, my fellow Americans."??

---

I couldnt care less what they do in Iran, however when there "great satan" rhetoric ends up being real support for terrorist organizations then yep :daisy: them.

Quote:

---

AFAIK "The Nation" is a US publication, the end of the street is a little closer to you than I am...

---

the article was written on how the U.S. should teach the history of 9/11 in a global context. So maybe we arent so much different then are we macsen? if i see BS, I call it BS.

Quote:

---

if I see I a liar, I'll call him on it.

---

The problem is in the context of this article, that its not just "calling him on it" its then going further and attempting to direct the discussion in broader terms in a "global society".

If you, or the author is that arrogant that you feel you need to pontificate about how a an event that occurred here, and had its greatest impact here should be applied in global terms here, then your far more bold then I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

bah, how about we compare feces output instead?

---

Pictures or descriptive text?:inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Pictures or descriptive text?:inquisitive:

---

You start, and in the end we can tell each other exactly how to present the findings to the other. Basically, you get to tell me how I should interpret my :daisy: and i get to tell you how to interpret yours.

Getting theme now?

:thumbsup:

Maybe we're working on different definitions of "global society", which was all I was originally refuting in what you posted. A la Voltaire, we should define our terms before the conversation :embarassed:

I believe - I may be wrong - that you see "global society" as having some sort of overarching organisation or at least consensus from which you can dissent. I don't - I see it as a statement that we all operate in the same space, and have to bump off each other every once in a while, and that it's not possible to withdraw from it. Isolationism is futile, unless you leave the planet entirely. Even the remotest hermit in the Himalayas breathes the same atmosphere as you and I, and in which nations of east and west, for instance conducted so many nuclear weapons tests. He may well be ignorant of the history of those tests - that doesn't keep the strontium out of his bones. His isolation is a de facto fallacy.

But seeing as we are inevitably going to bump into each other, I think it's a good idea to appreciate that the other moving bodies do not necessarily follow the same laws of motion that we do, nor do they necesarily understand how we are going to move in certain circumstances. Increased knowledge is always a good thing, on all sides. Collisions there will always be, but I'd rather see the sort that result in "Hey, watch your step, bud!" to the sort that results in 9/11. Your not caring how history was taught in Afghanistan during the 1990s did not prevent that event. Afghans not caring what US citizens learn about Afghanistan has deflected no carpet bombing.

The way history is taught and built into a national, cultural or religious mythos will have impacts outside it's own sphere. It is inevitable. Just as it is probably inevitable that all local perceptions will be distorted, every national mythos will be distorted, and that every nation will engage in some misguided actions due to that distortion of perception.

IMHO history needs to be taught in a way that understands that history teaching has a perspective, with objectivity, and academic and rational rigour, and free from any sort of political or religious control. I don't think that will happen, however.

I really don't know how history is taught in Britain's schools these days, it's a long time since I was inside one, and when I was I had little interest in the subject. So I've had to come back to it in later life, and re-educate myself, and in doing so, I have been astounded and perturbed to discover that so much that passes for "history" these days is driven by blatant revisionist agendas (even if you look at something as remote as the Middle East in the BRONZE AGE :inquisitive: ). If we are to keep any track of objectivity, there needs to be a global perspective, somewhere to step back to in order to take in a wider view. If you stay inside the box, all you see is the insides of a box, and often as not you'll be trapped in there with some nutter trying to redecorate the walls, painting a picture here, removing a text there, or redefining his genetic origins in a corner.

Maybe more pertinent to another thread, but to quote Orwell: "Whoever controls the past controls the present. Whoever controls the present controls the future."

THAT's why we should care how history is taught - everywhere - but firstly in our own backyards, of course, but we cannot pretend that what we don't know about can't hurt us, or that deliberating ignoring it can protect us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

AFAIK "The Nation" is a US publication

---

It might be "published" in the US, but it is FAR from and "American" publication. Its a great news source for 5th columnist infiltrating this great nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

I believe - I may be wrong - that you see "global society" as having some sort of overarching organisation or at least consensus from which you can dissent.

---

You have simplified my view, but for the most part your correct, particularly "consensus from which you can dissent" I dont believe consensus is possible given geography, history and nationalism.

Quote:

---

Isolationism is futile, unless you leave the planet entirely. Even the remotest hermit in the Himalayas breathes the same atmosphere as you and I, and in which nations of east and west, for instance conducted so many nuclear weapons tests. He may well be ignorant of the history of those tests - that doesn't keep the strontium out of his bones. His isolation is a de facto fallacy.

---

Your using an awfully broad brush to paint a picture. Breathing air is far different then the presentation of a historical event.

Quote:

---

Your not caring how history was taught in Afghanistan during the 1990s did not prevent that event. Afghans not caring what US citizens learn about Afghanistan has deflected no carpet bombing.

---

Your absolutely correct, neither would have been prevented from how history was taught on the otherside. Again, we seem to be in agreement on more then i thought.

Quote:

---

The way history is taught and built into a national, cultural or religious mythos will have impacts outside it's own sphere. It is inevitable. Just as it is probably inevitable that all local perceptions will be distorted, every national mythos will be distorted, and that every nation will engage in some misguided actions due to that distortion of perception.

---

This is becoming long in the tooth, but okay, yes I agree, yet there is no universal application of ones perception, its often exclusive to a minority, on a global scale.

Quote:

---

IMHO history needs to be taught in a way that understands that history teaching has a perspective, with objectivity, and academic and rational rigour, and free from any sort of political or religious control. I don't think that will happen, however.

---

Now we are finding division, in the case presented in the article 9/11 cannot be deviod of political or religous content, because that would defy its cause and subsequent reactions.

This is clearly a case where perception is in the eye of the individual or group of individuals, not in the whole.

Quote:

---

If we are to keep any track of objectivity, there needs to be a global perspective, somewhere to step back to in order to take in a wider view. If you stay inside the box, all you see is the insides of a box, and often as not you'll be trapped in there with some nutter trying to redecorate the walls, painting a picture here, removing a text there, or redefining his genetic origins in a corner.

---

There in lies the paradox of your argument, objectivity is a subjective concept. If we infact were a "global society" that subjectivity wouldnt be present. I can try and be objective but alas as a race we havent achieved it yet and its my contention that its folly to do so (given our less then stellar track record).

Quote:

---

It might be "published" in the US, but it is FAR from and "American" publication.

---

Does that mean that it publishes things that in your opinion are not true blooded flag waving "patriot" stuff ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

You start, and in the end we can tell each other exactly how to present the findings to the other. Basically, you get to tell me how I should interpret my :daisy: and i get to tell you how to interpret yours.

Getting theme now?

:thumbsup:

---

Yes, but now I don't want anymore. :scastle:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Its a great news source for 5th columnist infiltrating this great nation.

---

Those are everywhere, always watch your back.

The point is moot. Which global society? I don't see one. :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

It might be "published" in the US, but it is FAR from and "American" publication. Its a great news source for 5th columnist infiltrating this great nation.

---

Anybody want to bet that Dave has one of those fancy rolls of toilet paper that has a new "word of the day" on every square?

I'm betting Dave deposited the residue of his fecal matter on the word "fifth column" sometime earlier this week.

Speaking of September 11th, I just came back from a BBQ at my kid's school and a few of us parents were wondering why all the elementary school kid's agendas have September 11th marked with a small blue and red ribbon in the corner of the date box. None of the parents are anti-American (though they all detest Bush), one is even a local fireman who constantly wears a 9/11 NYFD ball cap, but even he was wondering why 9/11 is noted in a nine year-olds agenda to the exclusion of every other historical incident.

We all thought it reeked of propaganda and was out of place. I think our concerns are going to be brought up with the school governing board. It will be interesting to hear what they have to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beirut

Speaking of September 11th, I just came back from a BBQ at my kid's school and a few of us parents were wondering why all the elementary school kid's agendas have September 11th marked with a small blue and red ribbon in the corner of the date box. None of the parents are anti-American (though they all detest Bush), one is even a local fireman who constantly wears a 9/11 NYFD ball cap, but even he was wondering why 9/11 is noted in a nine year-olds agenda to the exclusion of every other historical incident.

We all thought it reeked of propaganda and was out of place. I think our concerns are going to be brought up with the school governing board. It will be interesting to hear what they have to say.

---

your mad at the rememberance of 9-11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K COSSACK

your mad at the rememberance of 9-11?

---

Not at all. I have great empathy for my American friends and family.

My (our) concern is why 9/11 is noted in a nine-year old's Canadian school issue agenda to the exclusion of all other historical events. It is odd, if not downright questionable.

I agree Beirut, making it look like the only important thing during a year sounds like a very bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goofball

Anybody want to bet that Dave has one of those fancy rolls of toilet paper that has a new "word of the day" on every square?

I'm betting Dave deposited the residue of his fecal matter on the word "fifth column" sometime earlier this week.

---

Actually I use a more enviromentally friendly method. It involves a Canadian flag and there is little waste. When its too soiled, I simply print out any number of your postings and use that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I agree Beirut, making it look like the only important thing during a year sounds like a very bad idea.

---

Its because it is still realatively recent and there was a large loss of life. The bombings in England and Spain were just not to the scale of September 11th. But don't worry, the religion of peace is bound to kill a whole lot on a different date so we can forget about September 11th with all the other dates of Islamic terror. :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beirut

Not at all. I have great empathy for my American friends and family.

My (our) concern is why 9/11 is noted in a nine-year old's Canadian school issue agenda to the exclusion of all other historical events. It is odd, if not downright questionable.

---

I'm with the lumberjack on this one. Earlier this week, we had a two minute 'moment' of silence in rememberance of 9/11. Curiously, we never have one for Pearl Harbor on December 7. Or come to think of it, we never have any rememberances for ANY historical event other than 9/11. Considering I go to a Catholic school, you'd think that, according to the supposed standards of morality and empathy and so forth, we should have one for August 6 and August 9, when we dropped Little Boy and Fat Man on the Japanese. Afterall, according to Catholic teaching, all humans are equal regardless of national affiliation. But then, my school is a cesspool of hypocrisy and staunch republicanism, so I'm not really all that surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greaterkhaan

I'm with the lumberjack on this one. Earlier this week, we had a two minute 'moment' of silence in rememberance of 9/11. Curiously, we never have one for Pearl Harbor on December 7. Or come to think of it, we never have any rememberances for ANY historical event other than 9/11. Considering I go to a Catholic school, you'd think that, according to the supposed standards of morality and empathy and so forth, we should have one for August 6 and August 9, when we dropped Little Boy and Fat Man on the Japanese. Afterall, according to Catholic teaching, all humans are equal regardless of national affiliation. But then, my school is a cesspool of hypocrisy and staunch republicanism, so I'm not really all that surprised.

---

Do you have any clue as to what the Japanese were doing during that time frame or the fact we were at war with them? Tell that to a WW2 vet and see how they feel about your empathy about the Japanese. Again, this is a recent event, more civilians killed in 1 day in "our" nation's history. Like I said earlier, a much worse Islamic attack will come on a different day and then some of us can mourn while the rest of you moan about moral relativism.:no:

I really think it's a recency thing, Beirut. Do you really think whomever designed the agenda has the idea that American deaths are more significant than others? That maybe an American 'infiltrated' the agenda committee, twisted a few arms, bought off some folks, and had this bit of propaganda slipped in?

I know you have some close American relatives (iirc) and have mentioned your admiration for alot of American qualities and values on this board, so I don't think your taking a cheap shot or US bashing or whatever. Just think the suspicion is prolly unnecessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Do you have any clue as to what the Japanese were doing during that time frame or the fact we were at war with them? Tell that to a WW2 vet and see how they feel about your empathy about the Japanese. Again, this is a recent event, more civilians killed in 1 day in "our" nation's history. Like I said earlier, a much worse Islamic attack will come on a different day and then some of us can mourn while the rest of you moan about moral relativism.:no:

---

I am quite aware of the Japanese torture camps, bamboo up the fingernails, etc...Are you aware as to the Catholic Church's teachings regarding human life and civilian deaths? The church is vehemently against the involvement of civilians in warfare, and the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima obviously resulted in a massive number of civilian deaths. I am not saying whether or not it was right to drop the A-bombs; rather, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of my school, which is backed by the church.(which is a favorite pasttime of mine)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Its because it is still realatively recent and there was a large loss of life. The bombings in England and Spain were just not to the scale of September 11th. But don't worry, the religion of peace is bound to kill a whole lot on a different date so we can forget about September 11th with all the other dates of Islamic terror. :2thumbsup:

---

Yes, I can understand that to some degree.

I just think that small kids can be easily influneced, if I had seen that as a kid the notion that 9/11 has to be something really, really special would have sticked for a long time I guess. While you are right that we shouldn't sleep because some scumbad is probably playing another attack, we also shouldn't go all barbaric on the Middle East or cower in fear, I always thought there was a secret service for a reason.