99¢ for the first month.
99¢ for the first month.

Guest Opinion: Destroying our history erodes our nation

Larry Steiger

History often provides the pretext for conflict. It was the history of monarchies that provoked many 18th century revolutions; The history of a defeated Germany inspired Hitler and now, the history of colonization and slavery helps fuel our national discords.

The history of our nation that I learned or more accurately was encouraged to learn, was a mix of myth and fact. Characters were romanticized as heroic and cast into idealist roles of good and bad. It was all so simple. We embraced a need to entice young minds with stories that would appeal to their curiosity and instill a sense of national pride. After all, why not wait at least, until they are capable of some degree of discernment before scrubbing their minds of the possibility of the flawed heroic — we can always tear it down later. But for now sensitivities would dominate.

I became acutely aware of the introduction of sensitivities into historical conflicts when my young daughter asked me why we slaughtered the Japanese during World War ll. Tasked to read a novel about an unfortunate Japanese girl who ostensibly developed leukemia from the bombing of Hiroshima, she legitimately questioned the veracity of our actions. But while it may have been a compelling story, was it really "history"?

Furthermore was the lesson being taught that we needed greater understanding or, that we are and were usually wrong as a nation, and as individuals.

There was no doubt that our history or the way we perceived it was changing: The context of conflicts would now be sifted through a filter of victimization. Principles of liberty would be shadowed by goals of explicit equality. The idealism of our historic leaders would be replaced with the idealism of collective retribution. History was becoming a litany of contempt for the past and a platform for change.

We are cautioned to learn from history least, "we will be condemned to repeat it". But the fact is, we always repeat it. That may be due to our inability to reason how people that lived in the past could accept what we now find abhorrent: It should be "reasoned" that if we had lived back then we would probable have done the same thing. Doesn't make it right of course, it just adds a vital context. We also may lack the wisdom to learn that when a sense of our history is presented solely within a context of oppression, it lacks perspective and encourages us to indulge in self-immolation.

On Saturday most but not all Americans celebrated the historic founding of their nation. That is their right, on both accounts. The pretext for those rights was cultivated from the history of those we fought against. They were extracted and grounded in principles and concerns that prevailed long before our revelation taught us that the foundation for liberty is mostly exhibited by our "willingness" to "accept" differences.

Today's attempts to correct history or even destroy our history is leading to the condemnation of our nation as an ignoble enterprise based on the hypocrisy of our founders and the deceit of conquest. Here "the past is prologue". The future is based on the indictment of those who espoused ideals of equality while nurturing disparities. We are challenged to change under threat and blamed for failing to endorse a system of government that history tells us is authoritative. Question is, will our history provide the pretext for a greater conflict? Or will we learn from that tainted history that with few exceptions, the use of force and coercion destroys liberty.

Larry Steiger lives in Mount Laurel.