Straight from the tip of America's wang comes the report that the Florida state government has officially banned the teaching of "revisionist history" in public classrooms. Well, not quite, but the bill, recently signed into effect by Governor Jeb Bush, maintains that
American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence.
Aside from a missing serial comma (which, while technically not incorrect, always tweaks me a bit), let's examine just what's wrong with the above statement.
First of all, American history, as pointed out by Zimmerman in the above article, is necessarily constructed. He points out what should have been obvious to the lawmakers: A factual account of history is conceptually impossible. The best we can do is - wait for it - construct a logical and relatively objective account based on the available testimony and records. It is practically impossible to understand history as separate from this process of construction. The idea behind "revisionist history" is that historians revise and update our recorded history based on new ideas and knowledge. (Not unlike the bit of revisionist history that occured during the 2000 election, eh?)
Oh, but maybe this is all a big fuss over a few words that didn't even end up in the final phrasing of the law. The actual law printed above did carry the declaration that the teaching of American history "shall not follow the revisionist or postmodernist viewpoints of relative truth." Ah, now it gets interesting! Is this law aimed at history or contemporary philosophical thought? Boy, those conservatives really hate that crazy liberal postmodernism. Let's forget all about terrorism for a moment, for it's clear that the real threat to homeland security comes by way of Lyotard, Baudrillard, and Jameson.
But let's not think about that for a moment. After all, those words never made it into the final bill, right? Someone along the line obviously realized that these anti-intellectual rumblings weren't really getting anywhere and the bill was then revised to disguise the real intent of the lawmakers!
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Nancy
What's that quote about "the winner writes the history"? So...exactly WHAT history & revisions are they banning, here? Was anything mentioned by way of an example, or what? Are they talking about (un)Intelligent Design (which I doubt; after all, this IS the Shrub's brother)?
Banning unspecified versions of history. Hmmm...maybe Jeb is already planning on whitewashing Junior's historical legacy - in the top of America's wang, that is.
2 - Mark Saleski
wasn't there a town in florida that "banned satan"?
what is it with folks down there?
3 - troll
or one could say that all historians are necessarily propagandists and that 'objective historian' is an oxymoron
troll
4 - Nancy
Of necessity, Troll, wouldn't it have to be? Has there ever really been a historian without an axe to grind, even subconsciously, either to vilify or justify the past? I don't think it would be humanly possible, altho some have come close.
5 - troll
so now Fl passes a law that only certain propaganda is acceptable
can the secular inquisition be far behind
troll
6 - Michael J. West
While we're talking about inherent conceptual problems: all history is "revisionist." New evidence is constantly unearthed, new research done, connections established and debunked, aspects reconsidered in new ways.
If tomorrow there comes irrefutable evidence that, say, the Spanish really DID sink the USS Maine, that's revisionist history. What the hell are Florida history teachers supposed to do then?
7 - Bryan McKay
The bill itself doesn't seem to really specify the details of what ought not to be taught, so there's plenty of room for interpretation by the courts if the curriculum is challenged.
One of the added bits of required teaching includes "the nature and importance of free enterprise to the United States economy," presumably to squelch any pesky communist teachers coming up out of the woodwork. Another includes stressing aspects of "limited government" as defined in the Declaration of Independence. While all this is, of course, part of American history, there does seem to be a bit more emphasis places directly on conservative values of government.
Not everything in there is bad - the study of "women's contributions," "Hispanic contributions," and "kindness to animals" (!) are all stressed as important topics, which I suppose can't really be argued with.
It is a bit unnerving to see the law bristling about constructivists and revisionists. Apparently the state government would rather not have its citizens believe that historians are ever wrong or deliberately passing misinformation. Whatever bias a historian has, left-leaning or right-leaning, there is always going to be a certain interpretation of facts unique to the individual.
8 - troll
scary that the bill puts the decision as to what is real history in the hands of lawyers and the courts isn't it - ?
troll
9 - Bryan McKay
It's scary that the decision as to what is real history is in the hands of anyone but legitimate historians and scholars.
10 - troll
yup - but we wouldn't want slippery characters like Zinn and Chompsky slipping though the net and into Fl classrooms
troll
11 - Bryan McKay
Re: Saleski - Florida town casts out Satan (via CNN.com)
Supposedly this is the full text of the proclamation. Good thing they decided that Satan would no longer rule over their citizens, I think they were getting tired of shoveling all that coal into the firepits of hell.
12 - Mark Saleski
definitely one of those "you can't make this stuff up" kinda things.
13 - Bryan McKay
We are taking everything back that the devil ever stole from us.
He still owes me $20.
14 - Mark Saleski
damn, if only he'd been banned from orono, maine back in the 80's...then i'd still have my cool Bruce & Clarence tshirt that somebody (clearly satan, or satan by proxy) swiped from my dorm room.
15 - Nancy
I spent big bucks on black candles, etc. back in my college days, and he never did do anything I asked him to. Isn't that just like a man....
16 - troll
ahhh - but were the candles made from the rendered fat of the unbaptized - ?
that might have been your mistake
troll
17 - lori
I think to Jeb Bush and many Floridians, "revisionist history" refers to anything written after the New Testament.
18 - Natasha
I think it's interesting that history, a story written by people in power, is now being regulated by people in power just at the time when it seems that a good amount (not all) of Americans are starting to realize that truth is all about perception, not about facts. Of course those in power want history to be taught as fact! Because they don't want to lose control over all aspects of our perception of reality.
19 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
So now we see the erection of a little "Ministry or Truth" in Florida. Is a "Ministry of Love" and "Ministry of Plenty" soom to follow?
"The clock struck thirteen as Winston Smith hurried by the Tallahassee State Capitol on the way to work..."
20 - JustOneMan
"History is a constant process, not a definitive set of facts." Say what?
Serving time...I mean living in New Jersey...with children in public school I can see by your quote why we are slippin and slidin in to the abyss...
Acording to the "constant process" - Christopher Columbus was a moron who was a mass murderer...the White europeans who founded this country were really a buch of creeps...due to politcal correct "constant process" we must give equal political and societal importance to George Washingtion and RUN DNC!
So college boy...hisory is not a definitive set of facts ehh...so would you deny the right to teach alternative views of the holocaust or what happened on 911...remember its not 'not a definitive set of facts" that 6 million were exterminated and a bunch of Muslim Arabs hijacked some planes and killed a bunch on innocent people...but maybe based upon your view of history some people believe "due the constant process" that these things didnt happen the way the did...
Just one mans opinion...
21 - Bryan McKay
JustOneMan: That's a horribly gross misreading of what I wrote in my article. There is not a definitive set of facts about history, which is why we're constantly discovering new information and discrediting old information.
It is a fact that six million people were exterminated during the Holocaust. It is a fact that a group of Arabs hijacked planes and killed innocent people. But these events by themselves are not "history." History is the narrative we weave to explain and tie together these facts. The narrative is constantly being rewritten and enriched by new information. If something is reliable and accurate, like the facts of the Holocaust or 9/11, then there is no reason for them to be revised. Eventually the truth, or the closest approximation, will stand. If these events are understood as accurately as possible, there's no need to fear any future revision, right?
22 - Silas Kain
Revisionist history is a dangerous thing. Look at Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Their misquoted, mistranslated, misspoken words have been the foundation for the greatest collective slaughter of humankind.
23 - Bryan McKay
There is a difference between misquoting, mistranslating, and misspeaking and factual, accurate revision.
24 - Silas Kain
Are you positing that the New Testament is factual, accurate revision? I have to say that I respectfully disagree. The Gospels which remain today at the core of Christianity were selected by a handful of men who were more interested in worldly power than the Kingdom of God.
25 - Bryan McKay
I didn't mean to address the New Testament specifically, Silas. I simply meant that there are two different kinds of "revision." The type which applied the the New Testament may be the misquoted, etc. version - I'm not familiar enough with the Bible to know - but that's not indicative of all "revisionist history."