Well, you know what they say… those who fail to learn from history can still average a 3.0 if they ace all their other subjects.
I am sure we’ll see a lot more black history in our textbooks than before as we ween ourselves off of the whitewashed version of our history, so that we’ll get more than just “Obama was the first black president.” But Trump brought out racism into the fore, showing what work we had. He mounted a failed insurrection, which I believe will get noted like other insurrections. If he takes down the Republican Party by cementing the divisions, or even gets the Republican Party to give up the Southern Strategy, that would be notable as well.
I also considered just what portion of the small amount of time spent on modern American history in our American history books was devoted to talking about Watergate. It definitely seemed like a larger portion, simply because of it being bad. I also remember how Johnson was the point where we took a dive into impeachment and what it entails, and now we’ll have a more recent example with a lot more data about what happened, making that a good point do that.
I think Obama will get a lot, but I think exploring what went wrong will have more space. And I think it should, for the reason I stated. If those who don’t learn history are doomed to repeat it, then it’s the bad stuff we need to know about most. We need more of the faults of American history to be taught, and I’m hoping we’re trending that way now.
That a coup DID happen here I think put a dent in American exceptionalism. That fascism almost did take root here also does so. That we saw so many parts of our government that were just customs shows that, as well. I very much hope we’re having a wakeup call for why ignoring our warts is not helpful.
I’m curious to see, if I live long enough, whether the veridct of history is that Trump in general, and January 6 in particular, are evidence of how robust American democracy is, or of how fragile it is.
Trump certainly stress-tested American democracy. Problem is, sometimes such tests destroy whatever it is being tested.
He certainly showed where the cracks are, and there are a lot of cracks. The problem is if someone smarter figures out how to break them.
Even if we go back to “normal” and don’t have a white terrorist insurgency and don’t continue to slide away from liberal democracy, it’s Trump by far. Trump being impeached twice, trumps any of Obama’s accomplishments as far as the history books are concerned.
Hell, kids might not even talk about Obama in like 15 years. It’ll be like talking about HW.
Within America? The answer is pretty obvious.
Whatever happens, no matter how objectively bad, it always means that the US is the “greatest country in the world”.
American exceptionalism is often little more than an excuse for not acknowledging real problems, even though people who say such things often don’t realize that.
So yeah, it will show how strong American democracy is, and how the US is better placed to advise other countries on their democracies, having been through such an insurrection (I think Biden might have already said something like this)
Seems a little different between a veep following Reagan and the first black president.
Now I have no problem throwing attention at the Bushes either. They were president for 12 years. Trump four. That’s why I don’t see all of this attention being thrown at Trump when you are discussing all of American history, many administrations. It’s a sidebar, an oversell. You need to understand history books.
You missed the chance for this Polk reference
Right. If it can fit into a narrative, it’ll be discussed. If Trumpism becomes a major part of US politics, then yes, Trump will get a chapter. If it does not, it gets relegated to a section of the backlash to the first black President.
I mean how much time was spent on Andrew Johnson (the first President who was impeached) in high school history books?
His presidency gets wrapped in with Reconstruction.
At the time, the fact John F. Kennedy was the first Catholic president was a huge goddamn deal. Not as big as Obama being black but it really mattered to some people. Today it’s not even something most people particularly know or remember.
The only reason it’s not a big deal now is because anti-Catholic bigotry doesn’t really exist that much anymore - mostly because conservative Catholics and conservative Evangelicals have made common cause.
Now if we solve white supremacy in 50 years, maybe Obama will be seen as less of an accomplishment, but I doubt we’ll be there by then.
The historic oppression of black people by this country is far greater than that of Catholics and the significance will not be forgotten 50 years from now even if we make great progress towards racial equality. It also shouldn’t, it was a massive step forward for this country and a herculean accomplishment on the part of Obama. It would be like thinking that Jackie Robinson playing in the MLB wasn’t a big deal.
It’s greater, but it’s easy to forget or just not realize from 2021’s vantage just how big a sea change an Irish[!] Catholic[!!] president was in 1960. A century before, the Know Nothings were regularly winning elections and came very close to establishing themselves as a national 3rd party largely based on anti-Irish and anti-Catholic bigotry. It was pretty much within Kennedy’s lifetime that Irish-Americans became broadly accepted as “white” and Catholics became broadly accepted as “Christian” in the U.S. And even then, his religion was not just a big deal implicit, it was explicit. He actually felt compelled to give a national speech to reassure voters that his first allegiance was to the U.S. and not the Pope.
I don’t think Obama being the first Black president will be forgotten in 50 years, but I just don’t think professional historians are going to spend as much time and wordage writing about it and the rest of Obama’s presidency as they will writing about Trump’s presidency.
I definitely think Trump is going to have more written about him.
I think Obama (hopefully) is a significant part of a long story of America trying to become a better place. Trump is a rejection of that and whether the future is more Trumpism or if we right course, how much damage he was successful at inflicting is a bigger story.
I think the big difference between Obama and Kennedy is not just that there was so much skepticism about if they could win in spite of being part of an out-group; it’s that the presence of never having a black president was a huge symbol for the limited opportunities offered to black people, and breaking that massively shifted the race conversation in America.
I would imagine that future historians will be captivated by the outright weirdness that is the Trump era. Four (thankfully, just four!) years of sheer madness, sandwiched between two competent administrations, Obama and Biden.
Again I will point out that the controversial, corrupt, and scandalous presidents have NOT been overmentioned in the history books, as the news cycles about them wane and people move on.
For Trump to really be heavily recorded in anything other than a tome focusing on him only, a greater sweep of history, he has to impact something lasting. I do not believe he deserves a major role in the COVID story. That’s the singular historical event of his term. He has to influence something else or set us on a course that others will emulate and follow. Trump’s narcissism tends to make that unlikely in my view, it’s all about him and he can’t delegate to any sort of larger movement. And he cares more about himself than any issues. But we’ll see. Barring that sort of historical impact, there’s no need for a historian to insert Trump excessively into the narrative, regardless of the juicy gossip people of 2021 think will always be of import. The inflating of Trump’s impact is to date simply recency bias.
The day may someday come when people won’t realize what a big deal it was. Our perspective on history fades.
Yet that didn’t happen with Jackie Robinson. In fact, that event only took on added significance in the years following Robinson’s death.
I think it was amazing that Obama was elected. How many people saw that coming. There were very few black elected politicians outside of big city mayors. I certainly would have placed money on a woman being elected USA president far before a black man. So Obama’s election was an amazing event.
Trump’s election was not nearly so amazing. People had called for a businessman to be elected president numerous times. Trump was very famous. Much less momentous than Obama.
What makes Trump an outlier is effectively his villainy. Where he was willing to go. I have said that Trump is unimportant to the story of COVID. That leaves 1/6/2021. That may be mentioned, but Trump is on the order of Joseph McCarthy. Are you going to mention McCarthy when talking about the 1950s? Probably. Does that make him important? I think villains are talked about in a different way than people making reasonable choices, heroic or flawed people. So there will be a reluctance to go into Trump more than necessary.