Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-15-2018, 04:33 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,265
"Revisionist History"-Not just a lefty thing....

I thought this story worthy of discussion especially after all the accusations of "trying to erase history" that came in the wake of the Confederate statues controversy.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-boa...060257161.html
  #2  
Old 09-15-2018, 04:41 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 80,131
Not *just* a lefty thing? When is it ever?
  #3  
Old 09-15-2018, 04:49 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot bobot is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 6,811
Erasing history is not possible. Taking down statues, yeah, that's totally possible. "Revisionist History" is a bullshit term with respect to racist hero monuments and their removal.
Lying to schoolchildren about history? Totally possible. If anything, the left is willing to look at, admit, and try to repair all of the shit warts involved in America's history.
  #4  
Old 09-15-2018, 05:06 PM
DSYoungEsq DSYoungEsq is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 13,886
In what way is this "revisionist" history? The recommendation of the study group to the Board was that students not be required to focus on so many people in history. Notice that the "article" linked doesn't even bother to list any other people currently required to be discussed being dropped. It's laughably limited in information.

Here's a link to a somewhat better article discussing the changes. Notice that Barry Goldwater is being dropped for the same reason Hillary Clinton is, and that there are many other people being dropped who are not specifically listed.

This sort of headline bait is exactly what makes people who are supporters of President Trump believe that the "media" are biased for "Liberals."
  #5  
Old 09-15-2018, 05:06 PM
Gatopescado's Avatar
Gatopescado Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 20,750
Can't teach everything. Where would you find the time?
  #6  
Old 09-15-2018, 05:10 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,219
That article is not available in Europe (big shocker), but if we were looking for evidence of right-wing bias in the assessment, dropping Barry Goldwater, a famously racist republican who got his ass kicked, is not exactly a knock-down argument.
  #7  
Old 09-15-2018, 05:42 PM
dalej42 dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,464
Every day, I keep wondering what the latest round of idiocy from the red states will be. I remember studying Tilden vs Hayes twice in high school Once, in American History as the end of reconstruction and a small bit about the electoral college. Then, in American Government, we studied Tilden vs Hayes again to go into more detail about the popular vote versus the electoral college.

Since then, twice the winner of the popular vote has lost the presidency. In 2016, there was an effort, however futile, to see if the electoral college would work as originally intended and make their own independent judgement if Donald Trump was suitable to serve as president.

Even if you're a die hard Republican, I can't see any argument against studying Bush vs Gore and the 2016 election. They are important in American history.

If the school board had decided they weren't going to include Reagan vs Mondale, Bush vs Dukakis, or Bill Clinton vs Dole, then I'd be fine with that. I agree you can't cover everything.

Last edited by dalej42; 09-15-2018 at 05:43 PM.
  #8  
Old 09-15-2018, 06:00 PM
Roderick Femm's Avatar
Roderick Femm Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 6,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
That article is not available in Europe (big shocker), but if we were looking for evidence of right-wing bias in the assessment, dropping Barry Goldwater, a famously racist republican who got his ass kicked, is not exactly a knock-down argument.
Cite for Goldwater being a racist?

This seems to be a fairly balance approach from the Washington Post (I hope you can see it if you are in Europe):

Quote:
“While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.”
This is based on his vote against the Civil Rights Act, which although misguided was based on principles of small government rather than on any wish of harm or negative consequences to any person of color.

My reasons for making this distinction include a desire for precision in public discourse, and a conviction that there are, in fact, useful principles to glean from a small government approach. Often those principles are outweighed by social concerns, but not always. This does not mean that I am either in favor of or opposed to having school children study Goldwater as part of their history lessons.
  #9  
Old 09-15-2018, 06:44 PM
dalej42 dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,464
There's a lot to disagree with Barry Goldwater with, but I don't think he was a racist. He was well known for his photography of Native Americans.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...elsen/7518017/
  #10  
Old 09-15-2018, 06:55 PM
Tamerlane Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,405
Revisionist is not a dirty word and I wish people would stop treating it like it is. Nor does it have any political implications whatsoever taken in isolation.

If you are not willing to revise your understanding of history as new facts come to light, you're an idiot and a shit historian. The last major Carolingian, Charles III 'the Fat', was probably not a lethargic incompetent as usually branded by pre-21rst century historians. He just got unlucky in terms of succession and the most focused on records to survive from his realm were written by politically hostile commentators. Those records were then filtered through the lens of historians looking for someone to blame for the Carolingian collapse.

History is theoretically fixed, Doctor Who not withstanding. Our understanding of it is not.
  #11  
Old 09-15-2018, 06:59 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,265
This story just kind of caught my eye because there are similar efforts underway in Michigan. One instance was the intended purging of the term "democratic values", because, despite their denials, it reminds folks of that political party. No word if the terms "community" and "society" were under consideration for banning due to similar concerns.
  #12  
Old 09-15-2018, 07:59 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 79,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
There's a lot to disagree with Barry Goldwater with, but I don't think he was a racist. He was well known for his photography of Native Americans.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...elsen/7518017/
That's an unusual definition of racism.

When Goldwater had to make a choice between supporting racists and supporting black people, he chose to side with the racists. I don't know if Goldwater chose this because he was a racist, because he sympathized with racists, or because he figured he'd get more votes from racists. But it was an immoral choice.
  #13  
Old 09-15-2018, 08:33 PM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 11,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
When Goldwater had to make a choice between supporting racists and supporting black people, he chose to side with the racists. I don't know if Goldwater chose this because he was a racist, because he sympathized with racists, or because he figured he'd get more votes from racists. But it was an immoral choice.
Or, Goldwater "sided with the racists" because he thought there was some other important principle at stake: IIRC, he disagreed with at least some federal civil rights legislation on federalism grounds, and also on libertarian opposition to government interference with the decisions of private business owners to end segregation (as opposed to the government itself either racially discriminating, or interfering with the decisions of private business owners by legally mandating segregation, both of which libertarians would rightly oppose).

I think Goldwater was wrong about that; racial segregation in a large part of America was all-pervasive, and had clearly been sustained and perpetuated as part of a society-wide racist system, which very much included racial discrimination by the state itself, as well as state-mandated racial discrimination by private enterprise (various Jim Crow laws requiring segregation in assorted public accommodations). To just say "OK, from now on, there won't be any more state-sanctioned or mandatory racism--other than that, y'all are on your own" was inadequate in the face of this history.

But I don't think it's fair to just say Goldwater was a racist. I strongly support free speech, for example, even when that means "supporting racists", but that's not because I'm a racist, or because I sympathize with racists; it's because I believe free speech is very important (and "hate speech" laws in practice are very often used to repress powerless minorities rather than to protect them).
__________________
"In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves." -- Carl Sagan

Ceterum censeo imperium Trumpi esse delendam
  #14  
Old 09-15-2018, 09:09 PM
F. U. Shakespeare F. U. Shakespeare is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Baltimore or less
Posts: 4,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
Or, Goldwater "sided with the racists" because he thought there was some other important principle at stake: IIRC, he disagreed with at least some federal civil rights legislation on federalism grounds, and also on libertarian opposition to government interference with the decisions of private business owners to end segregation (as opposed to the government itself either racially discriminating, or interfering with the decisions of private business owners by legally mandating segregation, both of which libertarians would rightly oppose).

I think Goldwater was wrong about that; racial segregation in a large part of America was all-pervasive, and had clearly been sustained and perpetuated as part of a society-wide racist system, which very much included racial discrimination by the state itself, as well as state-mandated racial discrimination by private enterprise (various Jim Crow laws requiring segregation in assorted public accommodations). To just say "OK, from now on, there won't be any more state-sanctioned or mandatory racism--other than that, y'all are on your own" was inadequate in the face of this history.

But I don't think it's fair to just say Goldwater was a racist. I strongly support free speech, for example, even when that means "supporting racists", but that's not because I'm a racist, or because I sympathize with racists; it's because I believe free speech is very important (and "hate speech" laws in practice are very often used to repress powerless minorities rather than to protect them).
Goldwater later said he was wrong to oppose civil rights legislation. I think that admission is as likely as anything (along with his landslide defeat) to be the reason Texas educators want to banish him from history.

Cite: John Wayne in "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon": Never apologize, it's a sign of weakness.
  #15  
Old 09-15-2018, 10:27 PM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 11,757
To actually address the topic of the thread: I'm sure determining exactly which historical figures and events should go in a grade school history curriculum is a difficult and complicated task. After all, there's a lot of history, and only so many hours in the school day or school days in the year.

That the Texas Board of Education voted to keep the alleged influence of Moses on our nation's founding documents tells me all I need to know about their fitness for that task.
  #16  
Old 09-15-2018, 10:51 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
I don't think he was a racist. He was well known for his photography of Native Americans.
Impressive. A new twist on an old revelation: "I can't be racist, i photograph [I]many people's/I] black friends."

Last edited by Ambivalid; 09-15-2018 at 10:55 PM.
  #17  
Old 09-15-2018, 10:52 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 79,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
Or, Goldwater "sided with the racists" because he thought there was some other important principle at stake: IIRC, he disagreed with at least some federal civil rights legislation on federalism grounds, and also on libertarian opposition to government interference with the decisions of private business owners to end segregation (as opposed to the government itself either racially discriminating, or interfering with the decisions of private business owners by legally mandating segregation, both of which libertarians would rightly oppose).

I think Goldwater was wrong about that; racial segregation in a large part of America was all-pervasive, and had clearly been sustained and perpetuated as part of a society-wide racist system, which very much included racial discrimination by the state itself, as well as state-mandated racial discrimination by private enterprise (various Jim Crow laws requiring segregation in assorted public accommodations). To just say "OK, from now on, there won't be any more state-sanctioned or mandatory racism--other than that, y'all are on your own" was inadequate in the face of this history.

But I don't think it's fair to just say Goldwater was a racist. I strongly support free speech, for example, even when that means "supporting racists", but that's not because I'm a racist, or because I sympathize with racists; it's because I believe free speech is very important (and "hate speech" laws in practice are very often used to repress powerless minorities rather than to protect them).
I understand the point you're making. But I feel that the people who were invoking states rights in defense of racism didn't really give a damn about states rights; they just wanted to defend racism. It's like the people who want to say they are pro-life but support capital punishment; if you're opposed to abortion just say that. Don't try to invoke a higher-sounding principle if you're only applying it to the cause you actually care about.

As for Goldwater, when he was running for President one of the main themes of his campaign was his opposition to the Soviet Union. He said it wasn't enough for us to just achieve peaceful co-existence with the Soviets. He said America should actively work on undermining the Soviet government and his justification for this was the fate of all of the people who lived in the Soviet Union and were being oppressed by their government.

Now by itself, that might be a good principle. But why didn't Goldwater apply the same standard domestically? Why did he feel an obligation to help Russians who were being oppressed that he didn't feel for Americans who were being oppressed? As a Presidential candidate, didn't he owe Americans at least as much support as he was claiming was owed to Russians?

I think Goldwater just had a blindspot that was typical for white Americans of his generation; when he thought of Americans, he thought of white people. He was aware of black people but he just didn't see them as real Americans in the same way. So he saw civil rights as a difficult burden that was being placed on Americans; he didn't see it as an effort to help Americans.
  #18  
Old 09-16-2018, 02:15 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,219
I believe my mistake was mixing up Goldwater and George Wallace. My bad.

According to CBS:

Quote:
The board also made decisions to keep some references in the curriculum which had been recommended for removal by a working group tasked with streamlining the curriculum, such as a description of the "heroism" of people who defended the Alamo, according to The Dallas Morning News. The board voted to keep references of "Judeo-Christian" values and their influence on American politics and history.

They also voted to reinsert the Biblical figure Moses as an influence on American politics, and remove philosopher Thomas Hobbes from the section on "individuals whose principles of laws and government institutions informed the American founding."
So replacing real history with fantasy. Lovely.
  #19  
Old 09-16-2018, 04:10 AM
PatrickLondon PatrickLondon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London
Posts: 2,911
All history is, to some extent, a constant process of revision: it is not the imposition of final revealed truth.
  #20  
Old 09-16-2018, 06:52 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickLondon View Post
All history is, to some extent, a constant process of revision: it is not the imposition of final revealed truth.
Is that the truth?
  #21  
Old 09-16-2018, 08:17 AM
PatrickLondon PatrickLondon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London
Posts: 2,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Is that the truth?
It's a sufficiently satisfying narrative for now.
  #22  
Old 09-21-2018, 08:12 AM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
I thought this story worthy of discussion especially after all the accusations of "trying to erase history" that came in the wake of the Confederate statues controversy.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-boa...060257161.html
I think you are not using the term "revisionist history" the way most other people do.

Revisionist history is when you portray the confederacy as the rebel alliance in star wars.

What the liberals are doing is trying to eliminate the glorification of the confederate Hans Solo. Stick that shit in a museum somewhere, teach it to the kids. Teach them that there was once a time in America when people glorified the generals that fought to preserve slavery in the south. Teach them that after losing, they would try to convert the war from a war against the spread of slavery to a war against a centralized federal government ([whisper]that wanted to stop the spread of slavery[/whisper]).
  #23  
Old 09-21-2018, 08:54 AM
Zeke N. Destroi Zeke N. Destroi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not A Real Country
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
...So replacing real history with fantasy. Lovely.
Am I wrong in believing that Judeo Christian values were highly influential in the lives of your founding fathers? That this influenced the documents they produced to frame the formation of your country? I suppose it would help my case if God were to have been included on occassion in important documents or speeches. If only... alas.

Hate to be the one to break this to ya but, you might want to sit down for this, the notion that Christianity was immensely important in the evolution of western culture is historical fact. Demonstrable, disagreed with by the intellectual equals of climate change deniers, historical fact.

The fantasy would be to claim that it was not influential.

This does not speak to the historicity of any figures mentionned in the mythology, nor the authorship and authenticity of the foundational tomes. Of those I make no claim whatsoever. Were I to make a claim though, I would come down firmly in the fantasy camp.
__________________
Zeke

Last edited by Zeke N. Destroi; 09-21-2018 at 08:55 AM.
  #24  
Old 09-21-2018, 08:59 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 17,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by dallasnews.com, with red annotations by septimus
... Among the changes, board members approved the removal of several historical figures, including Clinton and Keller, from the curriculum.

[Removals, etc. refer to mandatory curriculum. Schools or teachers are still permitted to teach about Clinton or Keller.]

The board also voted to keep in the curriculum a reference to the "heroism" of the defenders of the Alamo, which had been recommended for elimination, as well as Moses' influence on the writing of the nation's founding documents, multiple references to "Judeo-Christian" values and a requirement that students explain how the "Arab rejection of the State of Israel has led to ongoing conflict" in the Middle East.

In a note next to the deletion from the third-grade social studies curriculum in which Keller was included in a lesson about "the characteristics of good citizenship," the work group wrote, "Helen Keller does not best represent the concept of citizenship. Military and first responders are best represented."

[brawn beats brain. Got it]

... Five years ago, members clashed over whether science books should have to teach an alternative to evolution. ...

[note that the debate wasn't about permission to teach creationist lies, but about whether such teachings were mandatory.]

Remove the phrase "such as holding public officials to their word" from a requirement that students learn "how individuals can participate voluntarily in civic affairs at state and local levels" (this phrase was removed from fourth grade for "not being grade appropriate" and from third grade for "redundancy."

[Hmmm. Honesty is no longer a requirement for public office? sarcasm: was this feature proposed by the Ds or the Rs?]

... Remove the phrase "describe the optimism of the many immigrants who sought a better life in America" in a section on "social issues affecting women, minorities, children, immigrants, and urbanization."

[Immigrants are teh bad. Got it.]
Clearly there was much partisanship in these decisions. The decision to ignore Barry Goldwater is easily understood: they'd have to admit he was trounced by a huge margin, much bigger even than Reagan's victory over Mondale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
That article is not available in Europe (big shocker), but if we were looking for evidence of right-wing bias in the assessment, dropping Barry Goldwater, a famously racist republican who got his ass kicked, is not exactly a knock-down argument.
Both links load for me in Thailand.
__________________
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.

Last edited by septimus; 09-21-2018 at 09:03 AM.
  #25  
Old 09-21-2018, 11:43 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,508
One could make the argument that Hillary Clinton is so recently/currently in the news, that she doesn't need to be part of a history course.

I'm not so sure that unnamed members of the Texas legislature are four times more historically important.
  #26  
Old 09-21-2018, 01:43 PM
etasyde etasyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 179
It's not revisionist when the Right Wing does it, it's States Rights. Same as when they rewrite the expressly stated and oft repeated motives of the South in the War - that's not revision, persay, that's states choosing their own curriculum! Don't you know anything?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017