Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Community Voices features opinion pieces from a wide variety of authors and perspectives. (Submission Guidelines)

The battle over U.S. history: Students benefit from knowing the past, warts and all

By framing the issue as though America needed to be whitewashed to be great, opponents of full and open historical records diminish what America could inherently be.

The controversy around history curricula and history textbooks in American high schools has become an intense battle in the past few years for those who encourage an idealistic, homogeneous view of our nation’s past.

Nick Stumo-Langer

Recently released Texas textbooks assert that “slavery was an afterthought” as a cause to the Civil War and that “states’ rights were the real issues.” Political leaders in Oklahoma and around the nation challenged the revamped curriculum that the College Board set forth in 2014 for Advanced Placement US History (or APUSH) as “biased and inaccurate” in its portrayal of race and racism. Even now presidential candidate and neurosurgeon Ben Carson asserted that the new framework would make students hate America and “want to sign up for ISIS.”

College Board officials and professional historians, however, have defended the APUSH revamp as “better reflecting the ‘complex, unsettling, provocative and compelling’ truth of US History.” Texas schoolteacher Samantha Manchac is planning to encourage her students to “be critical of the textbooks and not take this as the be-all and end-all of American history.” That’s it, right? The battle lines are drawn; it is the typical liberal vs. conservative battle that has played out on our national political scene for decades to such detrimental results.


The real battle lines

The battle is between people who believe that showing the warts, blemishes and horrific tragedies of American History diminish its place on the world stage and those who view these past events as an essential learning tool for moving forward. Young people in the United States are growing up in a time of vast insecurity partially because of global events but also because of the encouragement of the news media. History courses such as APUSH, therefore, play a critical role in the formation of their national identity.

Article continues after advertisement

By laying all of the facts on the table, history teachers encourage students to make their own assumptions of our nation’s past. Sure, these students will come to some of the same conclusions that are commonly accepted historical facts: The United State’s entering into the Vietnam War was a tragic mistake based on a shady incident in the Gulf of Tonkin; the Boston Massacre of 1770 inflamed already on-edge colonists to whip up the tenuous group of Americans; and the Trail of Tears was a horrific tragedy that evacuated and killed thousands of Cherokee Indians from the Southeast United States.

New perspectives and insights

But, critically, these students will also be able to view the history of our nation with new eyes, with new perspectives and with new insights as to how we arrived at this point in our national narrative. By framing the issue as though America needed to be whitewashed to be great, opponents of full and open historical records diminish what America could inherently be. George Santayana’s adage, “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” applies just as well now as it did at the turn of the 20th century when it was written.

If America’s students do not learn about the past’s discrimination on the basis of race, creed, gender, political persuasion, sexual orientation and all of the other identities human beings hold near and dear, we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of our past.

Nick Stumo-Langer is a recent graduate of St. Olaf College with degrees in history and political science. He is a resident of White Bear Lake and works in the Twin Cities. His policy interests are wide-ranging and include K-12 education policy, telecommunications availability, and clean and renewable energy. 


If you’re interested in joining the discussion, add your voice to the Comment section below — or consider writing a letter or a longer-form Community Voices commentary. (For more information about Community Voices, email Susan Albright at