Editing History

In my reading of the first section of the second chapter, my frustration with the American tendency to edit history for the sake of national pride was fueled. Considering that Ursinus College itself just recently excused us from two days of classes in accordance with the predominantly northeastern tradition of celebrating Columbus Day, it was the first case of historical sugar-coating that came to mind, and one that he later mentions. My first encounter with the watered down version of Americas "discovery" was in second or third grade when I was assigned a book report that covered a book that presented the story of Columbus in much the same way Meet Andrew Jackson did for Tim Wise. To the young Ian Wiggins and likely many others, this was a story of bravery and adventure. It wasn't until many years later that I learned of Columbus's extortion, enslavement, murder and displacement of the Native American peoples. While there are countless examples of this bastardized history in nearly all levels of education, the true story of Columbus was particularly jarring in its implication. The most egregious of these is its utter disregard for the native inhabitants not only in regard to their treatment, but in the subtle manner with which it reinforces the notion of manifest destiny. The word "discovered" and how it has become associated with Columbus is sufficient proof in itself to this claim. Not only was the land inhabited prior to his arrival, he was not the first foreigner to reach American shores. To say that Columbus discovered America is about as accurate as me wondering into a strangers backyard and claiming to have discovered it, and then when they protest my trespassing I kill them and take their house as my own. I understand why schools and other institutions allow for history to be bastardized in this way, they want the stories to be free of controversy, to protect the American image, and to be child appropriate. Unfortunately, I think the cons profoundly outweigh the pros under such an approach. As the old saying goes, "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it"  and if we cant praise the accomplishments and simultaneously reflect upon the faults of our ancestors then we have failed our students. Students who, like so many before them, will grow up into ignorant, close minded, and profoundly biased adults. As for now, as Wise points out, criticism of Columbus, the founding fathers, and other prominent historical players in the building of the modern United States leaves you branded as unpatriotic. This is truly the most shameful phenomenon of all in regard to the rewriting of American history. It actively discourages learning from the past, and thus profoundly corrupts the students view of the past, present and future.