Ask the Historians
This page is for history students and their parents. If your teacher has said something that doesn’t seem to pass the sniff test, send us a question. If you are just wondering what facts might have been kept from you on a sensitive subject like the Cold War, or the New Deal, or the nineteenth century “Robber Barons,” send us a question.
Great question, Alex.
Certainly the worst of them is Howard Zinn’s book. Zinn always denied being a Communist Party member, but the posthumous release of his FBI file puts the lie to that. His “textbook” is anti-American, Anti-capitalist propaganda so over-stated that it’s downright embarrassing.
I guess the second worst textbook is probably Eric Foner’s, although I’ve never really thought about it before.
Certainly the least biased is America’s Promise; quite often it is the only textbook, of the seven I have, that will admit some bit of exculpatory evidence about some conservative or Republican the other textbooks are disparaging.
I’m glad you asked this question. I should probably figure out some sort of rating system and write a column about it. Thanks for the idea!
Al,
You keep giving examples of bias in the handful of textbooks you have collected. But you never say if one is different than another.
Is the bias worse in some textbooks than in others? Or all they all the same degree of propaganda.
Al,
No doubt, he was flawed. And I too, thought the comment was extemely well balanced with truth. I appreciate your assist on a response. Coming out of the conservative shell can be intimidating but being able to debate helps greatly and you’ve given me a good jump start.
Thanks so much for your work, it is much enjoyed!
Thanks for the great question. This is a classic example of the difference between the conservatives and liberals, when it comes to debating about politics. Your liberal friend did not even try to argue that Henry Ford’s words on wealth and redistribution were not true. She took the shortcut that liberals almost always take when confronted with ideas or principles they don’t like; she attacked person who made the statement.
We conservatives are usually more willing to debate ideas and principles on their merits. Liberals, for some reason, quite often refuse to debate the merits of an idea, and just disparage the person who brought it up.
That Von Shirach quote could well be accurate, by the way. Henry Ford did have a nasty anti-Semitic streak, as did his friend Charles Lindberg. But that does not make Ford’s words about redistribution any less true. Ford said that we can’t cure all the world’s ills by taking money from one class and giving it to another, and all the evidence says he was right on that one. Since the 1960′s our government has forcibly transferred trillions (literally) of dollars from the people who earned it to people whom the government wanted to “help,” and we still have all the problems that these wealth transfers were supposed to solve.
The Heritage Foundation’s annual Index of Economic Freedom always shows undeniably that those nations with the most Socialistic economic systems are the poorest, and vice-versa. It makes for rather dry reading, but the information is useful, and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in the subject.
The great advantage of this attack-the-messenger tactic that liberals favor is that it is so easy. Rather than adduce facts and arguments to refute something a conservative has said, you can just point out that the conservative has this or that personal flaw, or has said something stupid at least once in his life. Somehow the words are to be considered invalid just because the person who spoke them is flawed. And who among us isn’t flawed in some way?
Thomas Jefferson said “all men are created equal, (and) are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Are these words null and void because of Jefferson’s personal flaws? Jefferson did make some stupid and regrettable public statements during his eighty-three year life. Look, for example, at some of his comments about the French Revolution. Are the words “all men are created equal” somehow invalid because the same person made a few foolish statements years later?
When Frederick Douglass was just eight years old, he was wiser than your liberal friend. He knew that important truths could come from the lips of a less-than-perfect person. In his powerful and fascinating book Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, he tells how he, as an eight year old slave, learned about the value of literacy. The woman who owned him had taught him how to read a few words, and when her husband found out about it, he angrily demanded that the teaching stop. Here is how Douglass quotes his then-master in the book: ‘”If you teach that nigger (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave.”‘ (1)
Young Frederick Douglass did not think that these words were untrue, just because a cruel and unjust person had spoken them. “These words,” he said, “sank deep into my heart…From that moment, I knew the pathway from slavery to freedom.” He managed to learn to read despite the opposition of the man and woman who owned him. Then, literate, he proved the truth of his master’s words by working out an escape plan, and successfully putting it into practice.
If you want to rebut your friend I suggest that you start by conceding her point about Henry Ford. He was a man with some deep personal flaws; there’s no use in denying it. Then you can ask her if she really believes that all the world’s ills can be cured by taking money from one class of people and giving it to another. If she says yes, you will have succeeded in starting a real debate.
Al Fuller
(1) Frederick Douglass, Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass, Oxford World’s Classics, p. 39
I recently posted a quote on my Facebook page. I typically stick to the founding fathers, but saw this one and thought it was a good one for my daily quote. “There are two Fools in this world. One is the millionaire who thinks by hoarding money he can accumulate real power, and the other is the penniless Reformer who thinks by taking money from one class and giving it to another, all the world’s ills will be cured.” ~Henry Ford.
One of my Facebook Liberal friends posted this after it and quickly removed it.
“Von Shirach, leader of the Hitler youth movement, declared at the post-war Nuremburg war crime trials he had become an anti-Semite at the age of seventeen after reading [Ford’s ravings.] “You have no idea what a great influence this book had on the thinking of German youth. [...] The younger generation looked with envy to the symbols of success and prosperity like Henry Ford, and if he said the Jews were to blame, why naturally we believed him.””
She is a college professor and is currently homeschooling her child. I’m looking for a rebuttal and having a difficult time locating something. Do you have anything in your archives?