Editorial by Jan van der Crabben

History has become a political battleground in the United States. Once globally seen as the beacon of freedom, some states are now in the process of deciding which parts of history are acceptable to be taught in schools, and which are not.

In the wake of this discussion, teachers have struggled with how to discuss slavery in history class, as ambiguous guidance has been issued by some school districts. Not too long ago, a school district in Texas has told its teachers that books must always contain opposing viewpoints, and books that do not shall be banned from school: “And make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust,” teachers were instructed, “that you have one that has an opposing, that has other perspectives.” Understandably, one teacher asked: “How do you oppose the Holocaust?” No clarification was offered.

There are certain events in history for which there is no valid opposing viewpoint and I think we can all agree that “the Holocaust was a good thing” is not a viewpoint that any serious historian would present. The same is true for slavery, racism, genocide, or fascism. There are parts of history for which there is no “opposing viewpoint” because they are universally accepted to be immoral. Texas lawmaker and author of the bill State Sen. Bryan Hughes agrees and clarified that his bill does not apply to matters of “good and evil”.

In cases like this it is best to go back to the actual legislation that was passed in Texas. It’s a short document, so go ahead and read it. There are others in different states, but let’s look at this one for now. On the one hand, the bill requires educators to cover topics such as slavery, Frederick Douglass, the Underground Railroad, the Civil Rights Movement, the history of Native Americans, and the Indian Removal Act. It then requires teachers not to teach students anything racist or sexist, and students must not be told that they are responsible for actions committed in the past, and they must not be told to feel guilt or discomfort on the basis of their race. So far, so good; history can and should be taught without assignment of guilt or shame.

Teachers are required to present “diverse and contending perspectives”, which appears to have been the reason for this school district’s over-reaction on the Holocaust. Interestingly, the legislation singles out the 1619 Project as a topic that must not be taught! Led by the New York Times, the 1619 Project “aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative”.

How can legislation ask teachers to present contending viewpoints but then specifically outlaw this particular viewpoint? This is precisely a “diverse and contenting” perspective compared to the classic narrative found in US History class, worthy of discussion: To what extent has slavery shaped the United States today? History is not meant to make us feel good; feeling a sense of discomfort about our past is a good thing as it will help us avoid the mistakes of our forebears. Despite all of the seemingly balanced requirements, it would appear that nationalism is the true purpose of the bill.

Free societies do not politicize history. All of history needs to be taught; the good, the bad, and the ugly. No nation’s history is untarnished. History class is uniquely positioned to teach the critical thinking skills that will allow students to disentangle misinformation and make up their own mind. The Council of Europe’s publication Quality History Education in the 21st Century (recommended reading) makes an excellent case for this:

“History is a specific subject as it provides the answers to critically understand the present, by teaching that any feature of the past must be interpreted in its historical context and by raising awareness that historical interpretation is a matter of debate. The thinking processes acquired through the study of history constitute a standard of judgement that is transferable to any subject. Hence, historical critical knowledge and understanding of political, social, cultural, and economical systems intersects with the democratic culture necessary for active citizenship.”

The current political climate in the United States hinders the learning of critical thinking skills that history class provides. Politicians should leave the teaching of history to educators who know what they’re doing.