Weighting history

Just a warning...whereas more often than not, when you start out reading a serious post on here, it is just the set-up for a joke about cutting off the husband's hand or a penis museum, this is a legitimately serious post. It is inspired by some material I read in the auto-biography of Gary Sheffield, Inside Power , New York, 2007.

Sheffield is an angry man, always looking to see if he is being disrespected in any way, shape, or form. And if he isn't then he will find a way to prove he has been. One of his complaints, however, is one we often hear...about how history is a "white-bread version". And there may be some legitimacy to it.

However, the example he uses to show distortion is questionable at best. He talks about how German prisoners of war in Alabama in World War II were better treated than black share-croppers. I would not be surprised to learn this is true. To be honest, I did not even know Alabama housed German POWs. However, knowing the nature of the times, I would not be surprised to learn that such a thing happened. Let us never forget the brutal mistreatment suffered by Americans of Asian descent during the war. The "relocation camps" are a travesty and stain on our nation's history, as is slavery and the lynchings...and yes, the civil rights struggle...

But let us not forget these are not the first, last, or only examples of racism. Take a look at how the Native Indians were (and, in many cases, ARE) mistreated...and how for years NO immigration of "celestials" was allowed...and how the Irish were subjected to racism...and how "Okies" and "Arkies" were denied jobs and housing and were beaten, stabbed and shot for their horrible "crime" of being Okies and Arkies in California.

But wait a second...aren't Okies and Arkies....white? How can that be racism? Oh, but it existed...my own Grandparents happen to be among the flood of Okies and Arkies who went to California during the Great Depression and have those Grapes of Wrath type stories to tell.

But here is the thing...except for the occasional classic bit of literature/cinema etc., these things do not get into "mainstream" history. In the average Elementary, Junior High, or Senior High School history class, little of this will come up. At best you get a broad Western Civilization 101 type of sweeping overview. Here, I will give you almost as much of this history as the typically educated student receives.

"Early American history was rife with prejudice. The Indians, Blacks and Chinese were regarded with suspicion and mistrust. As a result of these attitudes they often were excluded from jobs and housing. Often they were victimized with beatings and even murder. It was not until the Civil Rights battles of the mid to late 20th Century that these attitudes started to change. Even today racism is an ongoing problem."

In a few exceptional cases you might delve more deeply into the fits and starts that represented major moving points; the moralist crusaders who led to the Civil War, the Underground Railroad, perhaps the Pullman case, then right up to Brown v. Board of Education.

I would wager I have, as both history aficionado in my own private readings and as award winning and Phi Theta Alpha history student at PSU, engaged in far more study of these things than the average person. I have written about racism involving little known groups. I have read innumerable books regarding racism during the war such as War Without Mercy: The Pacific War, by John Dower, in which he powerfully argues the battle against Japan was a near-genocidal race war and that is what led to the killing of every Japanese soldier on island after island. I have studied the Buffalo soldiers, the Tuskegee Airmen, the black regiments in the Civil War, the studies of black soldiers in the Revolutionary War, the use of Indian scouts in the Indian Wars, and more. I know the history of Andrew Jackson and his betrayal of the Constitution and the "American Ideal"...and how that ideal was also betrayed by the people demanding the removal of the 5 Civilized Nations.

In other words, I am educated in these matters far beyond the average person in this country. By no means am I the most educated...not even close. There are people whose knowledge of this dwarfs mine...but they are relatively speaking few and far between. And even I have not heard of a great number of the stories of racial discrimination and injustice.

Does that mean they are unimportant? Absolutely not. Educating ourselves about our past helps us prepare to improve our future. However...at some point we have to realize that nearly every History Class in America is at best covering the highest of the high points. Far and few between are the classes that cover the Triangle Shirtwaist Company Fire. Fewer still are the classes that delve deeper into the early 20th century phenomenon of wealthy young ladies moving into the slums to work hands-on for reform.

And that is a matter of time. If every event that should be covered was...well, there would be no time for math or science or physical education or anything of that matter.

So how do you decide what goes IN the history books used to educate our kids and what gets left out? Some moments are "in" because they are so iconic...Washington crossing the Delaware, for instance. But it is not just iconic, it is significant...that might be the difference between the existence of the United States of America and the existence of a few British colonies, part of the Empire. That night in Trenton restored the morale of the rebelling colonies, altered our standing in the eyes of France and the international community, and kept the struggle alive. What under-reported aspect of "non-white" life would you put in instead of that?

The Civil War coverage typically hits the high points...the Emancipation Proclamation, the causes leading up to it, the Gettysburg Address, maybe the Valley campaign, and Appomattox surrender, maybe a touch on the Underground Railroad and Reconstruction...and then we are done.

World War I teaches us about trench warfare, the harsh terms of the treaty, and then we are done.

In other words, yes...there is very little about blacks or reds or yellows or greens or blues. I bet you did not know the U.S. invaded Russia after World War I, either. But it happened. And it was a disaster. But that did not make it into the history books...because A) there isn't time and B) it did not alter the direction of world history.

There is a growing awareness of how things such as the backroom power struggles ended Reconstruction and litigation cemented the rollbacks. George Washington Carver is held in higher regard than ever before. The Tuskegee Airmen have received a lot of media exposure recently. People are more aware than ever of the heinous tale of the taking of the land from the Indians and their plight today.

But does that mean the history being taught is "white bread"? Or only from the point of view of the whites? It kind of goes back to "what is history". Is history the tale of the rich and powerful? Is it the tale of the faceless masses? Is it the tale of nations? Classes? Races? Individuals?

To be sure, that is a legitimate question...but it is not something that should be changed because some individual or group of individuals feels disrespected. The history as presented is accurate in general terms. The events that shaped the world as we know it are covered and the subtexts are there for anyone who wants to research them.

It is perhaps an unfortunate truth but a truth nonetheless that until now in Western European history the movers and shakers have, with few exceptions, been white and male. Where an anomaly has occurred...Susan B. Anthony, George Washington Carver, Crazy Horse, Fidel Castro, Harriet Tubman, Mary Lincoln Todd...they are covered. Future history books will be different.

Names like Jackie Robinson, Benjamin Nighthorse Campbell, Hillary Clinton, Vine Deloria Jr., Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, and so forth will make more and more appearances as their impact becomes more and more relevant to the path of nations instead of to niche areas of interest.

No doubt some people will be very offended by that reference...but when the facts are faced, for major, history altering events the majority of U.S. history is fairly accurately presented.

As more and more specialized fields open up this will change. When I entered my final year at PSU there was no such field available...were I starting now I could specialize in Native American history. If I want to study more closely that field, I now have a better opportunity. But for those claiming American history is presented "only from the white point of view"...well...please try your call again later. History is presented and, overwhelmingly, happens to mostly be about white people. But it is changing. Recognize that and realize...sometimes the time and place for information to be disseminated varies. This is one of those times.