[ A historian steps back to the 1700s and shares whats changed and
what needs to change.] [[link removed]]

HOW TEXTBOOKS TAUGHT WHITE SUPREMACY  
[[link removed]]


 

Liz Mineo
September 4, 2020
Harvard Gazette
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

_ A historian steps back to the 1700s and shares what's changed and
what needs to change. _

by opensourceway, This image was marked with a CC BY-SA 2.0 license.

 

Historian Donald Yacovone
[[link removed]], an
associate at the Hutchins Center for African & African American
Research
[[link removed]] and a
2013 winner of the W.E.B. Du Bois medal, was researching a book on the
legacy of the antislavery movement when he came across some old
history school textbooks that stopped him cold — and led him to
write a different book.

Yacovone, who co-authored “The African Americans: Many Rivers to
Cross” with Henry Louis Gates Jr. in 2013, is now writing
“Teaching White Supremacy: The Textbook Battle Over Race in American
History.”

The Gazette interviewed Yacovone about the origins of his research,
his findings, and why he thinks it’s necessary to teach the
difficult story of slavery and white supremacy and their legacies.

Q&A

Donald Yacovone

GAZETTE:  How did you start examining history textbooks from the
19th and 20th centuries?

YACOVONE: I had begun a different book about the legacy of the
antislavery movement and the rise of the Civil Rights era. I had spent
several months at the Houghton Library before it closed down. When I
was nearly finished with one particularly large collection, I wanted
to take a break and find out how abolitionism had been taught in
school textbooks. I thought this was going to be a quick enterprise:
I’d go over to Gutman Library at the Graduate School of Education,
take a look at a few textbooks, and keep going. Imagine my shock when
I was confronted by a collection of about 3,000 textbooks. I started
reviewing them, and I came across one 1832 book, “History of the
United States” by Noah Webster, the gentleman who’s responsible
for our dictionary. I was astonished by what I was reading so I just
kept reading some more.

In Webster’s book there was next to nothing about the institution of
slavery, despite the fact that it was a central American institution.
There were no African Americans ever mentioned. When Webster wrote
about Africans, it was extremely derogatory, which was shocking
because those comments were in a textbook. What I realized from his
book, and from the subsequent ones, was how they defined
“American” as white and only as white. Anything that was less than
an Anglo Saxon was not a true American. The further along I got in
this process, the more intensely this sentiment came out, I realized
that I was looking at, there’s no other word for it, white
supremacy. I came across one textbook that declared on its first page,
“This is the White Man’s History.” At that point, you had to be
a dunce not to see what these books were teaching. 

“Americans tend to see racism as a result of Southern slavery, and
this thinking has all kinds of problems.”

GAZETTE: What are the roots of white supremacy? How is white
supremacy connected to the history of slavery?

YACOVONE: White supremacy precedes the origins of the United States.
Every aspect of social interaction, particularly in the 18th and 19th
centuries, was dominated by white identity, and white supremacy became
an expression of American identity.

Americans tend to see racism as a result of Southern slavery, and this
thinking has all kinds of problems. First of all, slavery was in the
North as well as in the South, and the people who formed the idea of
American identity were not Southern slave owners, they were
Northerners. The father of white supremacy was not a Southerner; it
was John H. Van Evrie, a Canadian who ended up settling in New York
City. Van Evrie argued that if no slaves existed, the class-based
structure of Europe would have been transferred, kept, and developed
in the American colonies. But with the African presence, Van Evrie
said, the descendants of white Europeans saw that the difference among
white people was virtually insignificant compared to what they
perceived as differences between themselves and African Americans.
This allowed democracy, which was an unpopular idea in the 17th and
18th century, to flourish and develop.

We always forget that democracy was not an idealized form of
government back then. In fact, it was considered an evil. Van
Evrie’s argument was that Americans had to reimagine a new kind of
government and social order and they could do so because of the
African presence. This can also explain why white supremacy has
persisted for so long, because it is an identity of oneself in
contrast to others, a sort of a self-fulfilling, reinforcing thought
about one’s self-perceived superiority. Even people who opposed
slavery believed that African Americans could never be absorbed by
white society. Samuel Sewall, who wrote the first antislavery pamphlet
in 1700, condemned slavery, but he also characterized people of
African descent as “a kind of extravasate Blood,” always alien.
His idea remained central to the American mind for the next 200 years.

GAZETTE: Some historians say that white supremacy ideology served to
justify the enslavement of African Americans.

YACOVONE: The main feature of white supremacy is the assumption that
people with Anglo Saxon backgrounds are the primacy, the first order
of humanity. Van Evrie, however, saw people of African descent as
essential to do “the white man’s work,” and were designed to do
so “by nature and god.” He wrote about six different books on the
subject, and he used a racial hierarchy in which Caucasians were at
the top and Africans at the bottom. You’d think that white
supremacists were driven mostly by hate, but at the core they were
driven by their ideas of racial superiority, which of course were pure
fiction and had nothing to do with reality. White supremacy wasn’t
developed to defend the institution of slavery, but in reaction to it,
and it preceded the birth of the United States.

A lot of the white supremacists in the North didn’t even want an
African American presence there. Many Northerners advocated the
American Colonization Society, which would export African Americans to
Liberia. But there was no unanimity of ideas about white supremacy;
the only thing they all agreed upon was the “superiority of the
white race.”

“White supremacy is a toxin. The older history textbooks were like
syringes that injected the toxin of white supremacy into the mind of
many generations of Americans.”

GAZETTE: I once heard a Harvard historian say that the Founding
Fathers were white supremacists. Is that a fair characterization?

YACOVONE: Of course. Exceptions existed, such as Massachusetts’s
James Otis, but most owned slaves and those who didn’t, like
Benjamin Franklin, preferred that people of African descent never
existed in the American colonies. Thomas Jefferson is the classic
example. He is the individual responsible for giving us the phrase
that embodies the democratic promise — “All men are created
equal” — and set the trend to exclude slavery from newly acquired
territory. Yet, he refused to free his own slaves, considered people
of African descent inherently inferior, and when he wrote those famous
words in the Declaration of Independence he thought only of white men.

GAZETTE: What did the textbooks published in the 20th century teach
about slavery in comparison to those written in the 19th century?

YACOVONE: For the most part, the textbooks from the pre-Civil War
period through the end of the century followed a basic format: They
would go from exploration to colonization to revolution to creation of
the American republic, and then every succeeding presidential
administration. Anything outside of the political narrative was not
considered history and was not taught.

During the brief period of Reconstruction (1863-1877), the story
emphasized the fulfillment of democracy, and the ideology of freedom
suffused many books. This was a dramatic change. I even came across a
couple of books that contained pictures of African Americans, and I
was flabbergasted when I discovered one that had a picture of
Frederick Douglass — that was unheard of. Prior to Reconstruction,
textbooks had a few pictures, some engravings. But they disappear
pretty quick once we get into the 20th century, because the “Lost
Cause” mythology takes over academia and white supremacy reappears
with full force.

“We’re not teaching students the true American history because
African American history is American history.”

During the 1920s, the 1930s, and the 1940s, it was astonishing to see
positive assessments of slavery in American history textbooks, which
taught that the African American’s natural environment was the
institution of slavery, where they were cared for from cradle to
grave. There was a legacy of African American writing about freedom,
but the white power structure simply wouldn’t accept it as
legitimate. They dismissed the slave narratives as propaganda,
downplayed the history of Africans before slavery, and ignored the
work of African American scholars such as W.E.B. Du Bois and others.

GAZETTE: A report
[[link removed]] by the
Southern Poverty Law Center found that schools failed to teach the
“hard history” of African enslavement. What role have the
textbooks played in the miseducation of many generations of Americans?

YACOVONE:  This is the problem. We’re not teaching students the
true American history because African American history is American
history. I’ve been lecturing about this project, and every time I
ask students what they learn about the history of slavery, they all
said, “Not much.” But even if there are textbooks that deal with
those issues in a more accurate way, white teachers are so intimidated
that they won’t teach it.

GAZETTE: You mentioned in an article in the _Chronicle of Higher
Education_ that while doing your research, you found the history book
you read when you were a fifth grader. What did that book teach you
about the history of slavery?

YACOVONE: That was one of the great revelations of this research.
Like so many of these books, “Exploring the New World” by O.
Stuart Hamer and others, which was published repeatedly between 1953
and 1965, said almost nothing. All these books, particularly from 1840
for the next 25 years, go out of their way to not discuss slavery.
Some would say that slavery began in 1619, but most said it began in
1620 because those who are writing this narrative are New Englanders,
and 1620 is when the Pilgrims sailed on the Mayflower. Half the books
from this early period got the date wrong. If the textbooks wrote
about slavery, it was only one sentence and would never discuss the
nature of slavery or include any descriptions. When American politics
became absorbed by the debate over slavery, they could not avoid that,
and would mention the 1820 Compromise [that admitted Maine to the
union as a free state and Missouri as a slave state] and the 1850
Compromise [that abolished the slave trade -but not slavery- in
Washington, D.C.]. None of the textbooks published prior to the Civil
War would ever talk about the abolitionist movement, which began in
the late 1820s. It wasn’t until 1853, when the educator Emma Willard
published her massive history of the United States, that she mentioned
the abolitionists, but she didn’t say who they were or what they
were about, except that they were tools of Great Britain dedicated to
destroying the republic.

GAZETTE: What did the textbooks published after the 1960s teach about
slavery? Has there been any progress over the past few years?

YACOVONE: In the mid 1960s, textbooks began noticeably to change
because attitudes and scholarship were changing in the wake of the
Civil Rights Movement. Scholars such as Kenneth Stampp reimagined
Reconstruction, and it had a dramatic effect. There was a gradual
reintroduction of the African American element in history textbooks.
And now, many history teachers don’t even use textbooks. They’re
using online resources. Some of the best work is being produced by
the Zinn Education Project [[link removed]], the
Gilder-Lehrman Center, and the Southern Poverty Law Center
[[link removed]].

But even when textbooks are accurate, teachers have to be willing to
teach it. We know there are many white teachers who are afraid of
doing it. And you have to have school systems, both public and
private, committed to doing this work and not to punish teachers for
doing so, which is happening. The resources are endless. But it’s
complicated because in many states there are institutionalized
approval processes that determine what textbook will be used. And as
far as the publishing industry is concerned, this is huge money. Texas
and California dominate and they determine what gets published and
what doesn’t.

GAZETTE: What are the risks of not teaching the full story of slavery
and its legacy?

YACOVONE: This is essential work that has to be done. If America is
to be a nation that fulfills its democratic promise, the history of
slavery and white supremacy have to be taught in schools across the
country. We need to acknowledge that white supremacy remains an
integral part of American society and we need to understand how we got
to where we are. The consequences of not doing so are lethal. White
supremacy is a toxin. The older history textbooks were like syringes
that injected the toxin of white supremacy into the mind of many
generations of Americans. What has to be done is teach the truth about
slavery as a central institution in America’s origins, as the cause
of the Civil War, and about its legacy that still lives on. The
consequences of not doing so, we’re seeing every day.

_This interview has been condensed and edited for length and clarity._

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web [[link removed]]
Submit via email
Frequently asked questions [[link removed]]
Manage subscription [[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org [[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]