Support NeoGAF

[Piecake]

Until the late 1960s, history curricula in Trump’s home state of New York largely adhered to a narrow vision of American history, especially when discussing slavery, the Civil War, and its aftermath. This was true in the predominately white public schools throughout the country. The African American experience and its broader significance received little to no attention. When textbooks did cover black Americans, their portrayals were often based on racist tropes or otherwise negative stereotypes. Trump’s understanding of the Civil War may be out of step with current scholarship, but it’s one that was taught to millions of Americans for decades.

“The dominant story was that secession was a mistake, but so was Reconstruction,” Jonathan Zimmerman, a New York University professor who studies the history of American education, told me. “And Reconstruction was a mistake because [the North] put ‘childlike’ and ‘bestial’ blacks in charge of the South, and the only thing that saved white womanhood was the Ku Klux Klan. When African Americans read this in their textbooks, they obviously bristled.”

New York’s schools were no different. A 1957 report found a textbook on the city’s recommended list which, while roundly condemning its violence, said of the postwar Ku Klux Klan, “Its purposes were patriotic, but its methods cannot be defended.”

Sloan noted, for example, that even some newer textbooks “still cling to the romanticized versions of the happy slave life.” Abolitionism was mostly depicted as a solely white movement. “No text gives enough attention to the participation of Negroes in this struggle for their freedom,” he observed. Things got worse when students moved past the Civil War. “In analysis after analysis of the texts, the reader will find the statement that after Reconstruction ‘200-300 pages pass before we get a reference to the Negro,’” Sloan wrote. “This is why whites do not always ‘see’ Negroes. As Ralph Ellison puts it, they are ‘invisible.’ And the reason they are unseen is that they are left out from such a large part of American history.”

Racist material permeated other sections of the American curriculum, well beyond the field of history. Geography textbooks depicted Africa as “the dark continent” and either ignored it or portrayed it as a place of cannibalism and barbarity. “[Black] critics condemned biology textbooks, which often reflected eugenic theories of racial hierarchy,” Zimmerman wrote in a 2004 article on U.S. textbook changes after the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision. “Still other blacks attacked music textbooks for including songs by [prolific 19th-century songwriter] Stephen Foster, complete with Foster’s original lexicon—‘darkey,’ ‘nigger,’ and so on.”

These textbooks shouldn’t be interpreted as reflecting their readers’ views, Zimmerman cautioned me. Instead, they offer a window into what students would have learned in a previous era. “This tells us more about the culture of race as expressed in the curriculum than it does about what any given individual imbibed or not,” he explained.

https://www.theatlantic.com/educati...ald-trump-learned-about-the-civil-war/537705/

 

[HiredN00bs]

I would wager that, at this point, Trump's understanding of the civil war is more informed by conservative talk radio than any old history textbook.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Sloan noted, for example, that even some newer textbooks ”still cling to the romanticized versions of the happy slave life." Abolitionism was mostly depicted as a solely white movement. ”No text gives enough attention to the participation of Negroes in this struggle for their freedom," he observed. Things got worse when students moved past the Civil War. ”In analysis after analysis of the texts, the reader will find the statement that after Reconstruction ‘200-300 pages pass before we get a reference to the Negro,'" Sloan wrote. ”This is why whites do not always ‘see' Negroes. As Ralph Ellison puts it, they are ‘invisible.' And the reason they are unseen is that they are left out from such a large part of American history."

They still have a racist view of reconstruction or did 20 some years ago when I was in school

I remember role playing the south vs. the north in 5th grade. Just two sides that people randomly were assigned.

Reconstruction was also taught as a failed thing but northern whites who tried to impose their will on the south. Not a fight for equality for black residents. I think they mention the freedman's bureau but it wasn't really till AP US when I really found decent history of the time period

 

[OneEightZero]

I was very lucky to have some of the most progressive history teachers in my high school. A super rare thing in Mississippi. I bristle at some of the bullshit the conservatives spew here. The "Reconstruction" myth above is a big one, and the Lost Cause mythos is still prevalent here.

It infuriates me.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

I would wager that, at this point, Trump's understanding of the civil war is more informed by conservative talk radio than any old history textbook.

And obviously the racist household he was brought up in. His father was definitely a racist.

 

[nhlducks35]

Ah yes, the War of Northern Aggression

 

[Van Bur3n]

It broke Andrew Jackson's heart.

 

[maxcriden]

Sloan noted, for example, that even some newer textbooks “still cling to the romanticized versions of the happy slave life.” Abolitionism was mostly depicted as a solely white movement. “No text gives enough attention to the participation of Negroes in this struggle for their freedom,” he observed.

I'd be curious to know what fellow GAFers' (American and non-American) experience with learning about the civil war was. I went to public high school in the Northeast in the early 2000's and the entirety of my history textbook/classroom learning it was made very clear that slavery was terrible, that there was no happy slave life, that Abolitionism was an African American movement, and focused mainly on the participation of African Americans in their struggle for freedom. I realize this section of the article refers to an analysis of a 1957 textbook but I'm curious when that shifted.

 

[Strike]

Reconstruction was definitely a mistake alright, but not for those reasons.

 

[OneEightZero]

Reconstruction was definitely a mistake alright, but not for those reasons.

Elaborate?

 

[Fuchsdh]

I'd be curious to know what fellow GAFers' (American and non-American) experience with learning about the civil war was. I went to public high school in the Northeast in the early 2000's and the entirety of my history textbook/classroom learning it was made very clear that slavery was terrible, that there was no happy slave life, that Abolitionism was an African American movement, and focused mainly on the participation of African Americans in their struggle for freedom. I realize this section of the article refers to an analysis of a 1957 textbook but I'm curious when that shifted.

I was a few years ahead of you in Northern Virginia and I definitely got a pretty well-rounded view of the Civil War. Reconstruction was well-covered as well. If there was a gap in coverage, I'd say that the turn-of-the-century struggle for civil rights was mostly glossed over with "NAACP, Booker T, WEB" and got backfilled in when you talked about the modern civil rights era.

Elaborate?

There's a lot of Gaffers who believe that the South should have been utterly destroyed after the war.

 

[Strike]

Elaborate?

We should've dealt with them the same way Germany dealt with the Nazis.

 

[Tinfoilhatsron]

Elaborate?

It says in the OP that racists view Reconstruction as a mistake because

“The dominant story was that secession was a mistake, but so was Reconstruction,” Jonathan Zimmerman, a New York University professor who studies the history of American education, told me. “And Reconstruction was a mistake because [the North] put ‘childlike’ and ‘bestial’ blacks in charge of the South, and the only thing that saved white womanhood was the Ku Klux Klan. When African Americans read this in their textbooks, they obviously bristled.”

The poster was making a snark, I think.

Edit: Missed a word + grammar. Sorry.

 

[Geist-]

Baby Boomers were a mistake.

 

[LiK]

Trump never read a history book in his life.

 

[Lunar15]

Thank god I had an excellent teacher in high school that thoroughly covered this time in history and held nothing back.

Sadly, same couldn't be said about my education of the civil rights movement.

 

[OneEightZero]

There's a lot of Gaffers who believe that the South should have been utterly destroyed after the war.

I'm not sure if they mean those who believed in power or some sort of 1860's carpet bombing. Are we razing the South or commiting to eliminating racism?

We should've dealt with them the same way Germany dealt with the Nazis.

Good. We agree. Eliminate the symbolism. Educate of diversity and equality. *thumbs up*

The poster was making a snark, I think.

Hmmm. I hope not if the above is his view.

 

[Skatterd]

Hell I went to High School in the late 90's early 2000's and was told a lot of this. It's ridiculous.

 

[MetatronM]

They still have a racist view of reconstruction or did 20 some years ago when I was in school

I remember role playing the south vs. the north in 5th grade. Just two sides that people randomly were assigned.

Reconstruction was also taught as a failed thing but northern whites who tried to impose their will on the south. Not a fight for equality for black residents. I think they mention the freedman's bureau but it wasn't really till AP US when I really found decent history of the time period

I remember AP US History basically being like "Oh, you're actually a smart kid? OK, forget all that stuff you learned about US history then. This is what actually happened."

What passes for American history at lower than collegiate levels of education in this country is absurd.

 

[boredofcanada]

I agree, the North should have leveled the south and made the confederacy illegal. But alas, here we are.

 

[Journeywalker]

Hell I went to High School in the late 90's early 2000's and was told a lot of this. It's ridiculous.

Same time frame here, and in a very liberal area. There was an emphasis on dispelling the myth that Lincoln and northern leaders were driven by the desire to end slavery. While there is truth there, it missed the fact that for the south, it was VERY MUCH about perpetuating slavery.

 

[Kurdel]

Journalists should just start asking History questions at pres conferences.

As if Trump know anything about the reconstruction.

 

[Conciliator]

https://www.theatlantic.com/educati...ald-trump-learned-about-the-civil-war/537705/

I would wager that, at this point, Trump's understanding of the civil war is more informed by conservative talk radio than any old history textbook.

And obviously the racist household he was brought up in. His father was definitely a racist.

all of the above, and these things are not truly divided.

 

[sans_pants]

history is such a wasted subject in public school. the same colonial american history beaten into your brain every year, followed by AP if your lucky/driven that actually covers some topics correctly.

 

[Aselith]

As if Trump read his textbook

 

[Pantaghana]

I'd be curious to know what fellow GAFers' (American and non-American) experience with learning about the civil war was. I went to public high school in the Northeast in the early 2000's and the entirety of my history textbook/classroom learning it was made very clear that slavery was terrible, that there was no happy slave life, that Abolitionism was an African American movement, and focused mainly on the participation of African Americans in their struggle for freedom. I realize this section of the article refers to an analysis of a 1957 textbook but I'm curious when that shifted.

Non-American here. My history classes of the time period mostly revolved around various goings on in Europe with special attention paid to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The Civil War was covered very briefly: South wanted slavery, North didn't. War happened and North won.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Although slavery was a factor in the cause of the Civil War, it was not the main reason. The main cause of the American Civil War was whether or not states could secede from the Union.

^^^ This is what my middle school textbook said. The downplaying of our slavery history in this country hasn't subsided.

 

[Ceallach]

I'd be curious to know what fellow GAFers' (American and non-American) experience with learning about the civil war was. I went to public high school in the Northeast in the early 2000's and the entirety of my history textbook/classroom learning it was made very clear that slavery was terrible, that there was no happy slave life, that Abolitionism was an African American movement, and focused mainly on the participation of African Americans in their struggle for freedom. I realize this section of the article refers to an analysis of a 1957 textbook but I'm curious when that shifted.

Wyoming student here. This was pretty much how it was taught to us as well. My teacher's actually made a point to point out the fallacies in the "It was about state's rights, not slavery" arguments.

 

[MetatronM]

I'd be curious to know what fellow GAFers' (American and non-American) experience with learning about the civil war was. I went to public high school in the Northeast in the early 2000's and the entirety of my history textbook/classroom learning it was made very clear that slavery was terrible, that there was no happy slave life, that Abolitionism was an African American movement, and focused mainly on the participation of African Americans in their struggle for freedom. I realize this section of the article refers to an analysis of a 1957 textbook but I'm curious when that shifted.

Pre-AP History, the Civil War was taught to me in New Jersey in the '90s as: slavery was really horrible but also essential to the economy of the South which was why they couldn't abandon it even if they wanted to, the Abolitionist movement was mostly right-minded Northern whites (and also Frederick Douglass was there!), the Underground Railroad was a thing (again, kindly whites, and also something about Dred Scott), and the Civil War was fought over several states' rights issues though slavery was one of the biggest.

 

[Game Guru]

Pre-AP History, the Civil War was taught to me in New Jersey in the '90s as: slavery was really horrible but also essential to the economy of the South which was why they couldn't abandon it even if they wanted to, the Abolitionist movement was mostly right-minded Northern whites (and also Frederick Douglass was there!), the Underground Railroad was a thing (again, kindly whites, and also something about Dred Scott), and the Civil War was fought over several states' rights issues though slavery was one of the biggest.

This sounds about what my experience was with the teaching of the Civil War in high school in the South in the '90s.