I read an article my senior year from the New York Times, called “How Texas Teaches History.” It explores an aspect of the epistemology of ignorance that we have not touched on in class: grammar and diction.
When I first read this article, Trump was not yet the President of the United States and I had not yet realized the deafening truth that rhetoric could be used to cloud reality and manipulate the masses. Everything that comes out of a person’s mouth when they have something to gain reflects their goals, and all political statements, from speeches to textbook chapters, are made intentionally. Parts are chosen carefully and come together to make a point. What one chooses to address and necessarily what to leave out reflects one’s ideology. This is especially clear in the textbooks by McGraw Hill and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt that were written to comply with the Texas Board of Education’s agenda.
In 2010, the Texas Board of Education approved a social studies curriculum for public schools that “promotes capitalism and Republican political philosophies,” [1] according to the Times. The article provides a few examples of some disturbing content choices within the textbooks. These textbooks downplay slavery as the cause of the Civil War and actually promote it by pointing out the upsides to slavery. In doing so, they necessarily obscure the horrors and violence white slave owners inflicted upon enslaved blacks.
According to the Times, the textbooks claim that blacks living in slavery came away with cultural boons, such as tighter communities, Christianity (which provided “hope”), and of course, folktales which brought immense joy. [2] This angle on slavery seems to me a lot like saying that 9/11 had some upsides. After all, it brought the nation together and a cool memorial was built.
The textbooks go further by putting slavery and it’s circumstances in the passive voice, providing such gems as “whippings, brandings, and even worse torture were all parts of American slavery.” [3] The grammatical choice to leave out who exactly was propagating the whippings and brandings and torture is yet another avenue to obscure the reality.
These descriptions, weak with passive voice and cherry-picked evidence, miss even scraping the surface of any sort of legitimate explanation about slavery’s horror that might reveal another troubling reality. The reality that seems to be purposely left out in these explanations is that the entire society of the American South and all its institutions were on board with slavery and its abuses. These textbooks aim to eliminate this troubling detail of white southern culture by pushing the horrors of slavery to the margins, the acts themselves committed by “some” owners, [4] as if they are the exception.
The Times poignantly noted that these textbooks reflected Republican values and capitalism. Even just from the excerpts the article mentions on slavery, it is clear that the link between capitalism and slavery, which is an overwhelmingly supported link, is also the subject of obfuscation. Why might Texas Republicans be trying to shroud the fact that capitalism was a significant cause of one of the worst human rights violations committed in history? Why might the idea that obtaining material wealth is of paramount importance to society be in conflict with southern history? If these textbooks reflect Republican values, then Republican values are in direct tension with history.
1. Ellen Rockmore, “How Texas Teaches History” New York Times, October 21, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/opinion/how-texas-teaches-history.html.
2. ibid.
3. ibid.
4. ibid.
JD, I really enjoyed reading your post. I like the way you analyze how the diction and grammar used in textbooks perpetuate very problematic ideas. At my high school in North Carolina, I noticed very, very similar problems. I specifically remember my teacher telling us that some plantation owners actually worked in the field with the slaves; and therefore, slavery was not as bad as we thought. This is just one example of the many falsehoods I was taught. Luckily, I had parents that helped me challenge the information I learned.
ReplyDeleteAlso, you mentioned that Republicans and capitalists want to remove the history that proves slavery and capitalism are closely related. I just want to add that slavery is capitalism in its "best" form. Most capitalists won't admit it, but capitalism is most successful when slavery is allowed because obviously free labor is ideal for them.
JD, I appreciate the post and this is definitely something worth mentioning. The white-washing of the curriculum in high school history courses has occurred in other states too, such as Colorado and Oklahoma. Texas, though, went so far as to pass a law that required history teachers to not to teach the Advanced Placement Curriculum, which was provided by the College Board, but to stick to the broad state curriculum. This blatant move to hide history is also pretty comical coming from people on the right - the same ones that claim that left-leaning college professors are intentionally are teaching college students "revisionist history" are the same ones turning a blind eye, or even proposing, legislation that ACTUALLY revises history.
ReplyDelete