It has been another exciting week in the Trump presidency. The obvious big issue of the day is selection of a Supreme Court Justice to fill the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But there have been other issues. Not more than a week ago, the president was voicing his support for something he referred to as the “real history, not the fake history,” in other words, a “patriotic” history of America. Unhappy with The 1619 Project, a history initiative designed to encourage a discussion on the impact of slavery on the American journey, Trump’s proposed 1776 Commission remains unformed but more than just idle political blather. Insisting that teachers and university professors are indoctrinating students with a leftist historical narrative disdainful of the idea of American exceptionalism (equivalent in his mind as patriotism), the president demands a different narrative.
Before journeying down this path, we have a right to ask what expertise the president has to judge history curriculum(s) to include The 1619 Project. We could ask about the scope of his exposure to history, but his college grades remain as closely held secrets as his income taxes. We could judge his expertise by what he has said in public. Here there is the short list. During his 4th of July (2019) Independence Day speech, he proclaimed to the American people that “Our Army (referring to the Continental Army) manned the air (exactly how does one do that in 1775?), it rammed the ramparts (what?), it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rocket’s red glare, it had nothing but victory. And when dawn came, their star-spangled banner waved defiant.” There was no air travel in the 18th century making the occupation of airports problematic and as for the flag waving over Fort McHenry — wrong war.
Trump’s admiration for Robert E. Lee reappeared in a speech he delivered on Sept. 19 in which he claimed had Lee won at Gettysburg, the Civil War would have been lost. Maybe so but a professional historian recognizes such statements as “counterfactuals.” Lee did not win that battle (or the key campaigns to follow) therefore speculation of the war’s outcome may be interesting, but it is not history. Furthermore, to praise Lee is to praise someone who by the very definition provided in Article III, Section III of the U.S. Constitution, committed treason. How does the praise of traitors fit into Trump’s idea of patriotic history?
During Black History month in 2017, he lauded the ongoing work of Frederick Douglas, the former slave turned abolitionist. Two things were noteworthy in the president’s statement. First, one might rightfully claim Douglas as one of his time’s most ardent protesters for racial equality and equal justice. (Trump was vague about Douglas’ accomplishments stating only that he was receiving praise). Second, he seemed unaware that Douglas had been dead since 1895.
The 1619 Project has had its critics but the idea that the nation, during these troubled times, is long overdue for a discussion about its past and especially its relations with African-Americans and Native Peoples seems critical for the America we are building today. Trump suggests that to even ask these questions somehow diminishes America. My response to the president’s all too obvious attempt to impose a concept of ideological purity on our past is that this seems dangerously close to authoritarianism. History is a dialogue among various points of view. It is never completely settled. Its aim is truth rather than a fictional invention to serve a political interest.
JOSEPH R. FISCHER
LTC, US Army (retired)
Northumberland
Submitted via Virtual Newsroom
Today’s breaking news and more in your inbox
Credit: Source link