Politicians use history in many ways. They make history, as actors; they often write history, as diarists and in memoirs; some even read and study history and their claims to scholarly expertise on the subject give a degree of intellectual authority and respect (Clark, 2010). Politicians use history when it comes to terms with the past for different reasons. They use the past to demonstrate their own historical significance and their fidelity to national traditions. “History is made use of when it is activated in a communicative process in order for certain groups in a certain society to satisfy certain needs or look after certain interests” (Kangaspuro, 2010, p. ). Very often politicians and historians use “historical myths” to promote …show more content…
The rules and standards in this kind of use are approved as comparatively strict and professional. A narrative event must be understood, described and interpreted on the basis of a historical context. History can be seen as a prospective movement. Final results are not given, because history is permanent change. The focus in this category is on the discovery of new knowledge about the past and on its interpretative reconstruction. The historians using the scholarly-scientific use of history are aware of two different concepts of classifying the phenomenon. The first one is setting the narrative phenomenon in question and the second one is the front-line of scholarship. Many scholars in Western societies make us of this approach because they are living in a liberal environment, where they can be relatively autonomous. In the communist countries of Eastern Europe, the state takes often advantage of professional historians for their purposes, mainly relating to promulgate ideological concepts. “Even after the fall of Eastern European Communism and the Soviet state, many historians have continued to perform political and ideological roles, nowadays in the service of various nationalist powers.” In other East and Central European countries, however, the transition has made it possible to initiate a professionalization process, often by means of contacts with an …show more content…
This use can also be seen as an ideological choice. Generally speaking, the non-use of history is a successful strategy in societies where the legitimacy of the state is build on the belief that social-state relations are especially successful, or that the future looks especially rewarding. A socialist society, on its way to reaching the highest level of a Communist ideal society, had nothing to learn from the past, it was argued, but should develop through the everyday interaction between individuals in a society characterised by socialist virtues such as justice, solidarity and love. It can also be talked about the non-use of history, when an aspect of history is passed over in
“Why Western History Matters” is an essay adapted from a speech Donald Kagan delivered to the National Association of Scholars, and was reprinted in the December 28, 1994, issue of the Wall Street Journal. Throughout Kagan’s essay, he describes the essential need for the college course, Western History. He does so by examining older cultures and explaining why they were quintessential to the past and to our future development as a society. I strongly concur with Kagan’s standpoint of the necessity of history, and the realization of how exactly our flourishing society came about. History is a key constituent in determining who we are; for to determine who we are one must first know from whence they came. In the words of George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”.
After reading “The Betrayal of History”, I realized that a lot of things that I was taught as a kid about the history of the U.S. was manipulated. This article talked in earnest about how the history of this great country has been reduced, exaggerated and transformed to suit certain interest groups. It amazes me that the publishing companies are only interested in making money rather than print true historical happenings
It’s truly fascinating how there are so many different approaches to history, how so many different types of minds and schools of thought can come together to study the events of the world’s past. There are so many ways to approach what happened in our past, and the groups of historians previously mentioned are only a fraction of the actual number of different ways of researching and thinking that exists as it pertains to the study of history. History is in some ways, always a mystery, and all historians, regardless of schooling, training or biases, seek to accomplish one goal: to understand what occurred before us and why, and to use that knowledge to learn how the world was shaped into the world we live in today.
Unfortunately, American history does have a habit of covering up its history for the sake of offering its younger generations a progress model. In a book titled Lies My Teacher Told Me, James Loewen shows how the progress model mode of history telling has covered up many important events in American history to the point that children in public education are graduating high school with extremely warped views of history.
people see history in different ways for the simple fact that they do not see them in
In his short article “World History as a Way of Thinking” Eric Lane Martin, “…argue[s] that the most important things the field of world history has to offer the researcher, teacher, student, and general public are the conceptual tools required for understanding complex global processes and problems.” Anyone who follows the evening news or shops at Wal-mart, has encountered the processes and problems Martin speaks of. Our modern society puts pressure on a variety of citizens to grapple with and attempt to understand issues on a scale that moves beyond the local and national. History has long been a tool utilized by scholars, politicians and citizens to help them put current day happenings into context. That context has allowed for a deeper understanding of the present day. In an era when the issues cross national and regional boundaries the need for a different scale of history has become apparent. World history has emerged as a relatively new discipline within academia that is attempting to provide the context for large-scale processes and problems. As the field has grown a variety of authors, some historians, some from other fields, have attempted to write a history of the world. With such a daunting task how can we define success? How can we analyze the history that provides a true global perspective on processes and problems we face? By taking Martin’s two key characteristics of world history, one, it is defined by the kinds of questions it asks and two, it is defined by the problem-solving techniques it uses, we can analyze texts purporting to be world history and access their utility in providing context for the global processes and problems we face today.
I walked out of sophomore AP world history and human geography not only with greater historical awareness, but also the ability to utilize that awareness to engage with other disciplines. In pushing beyond mere identification and recall, APWH challenged me to shift away from passively accepting information at face-value, to understand how context and rhetoric framed knowledge. In constantly deconstructing the nature of historical and empirical evidence and the lenses in which objects of scrutiny are extracted-- especially those defined by conflict and transformations--, I learned to be conscientious of how authors’ material conditions and interests shaped the presentation of given narratives. In-class emphasis of making historical connections while reading became ingrained into my
As the first chapter in this long analytical book, chapter one serves as the foundation for the rest of the novel, with a basic premise that “history textbooks make fool out of the students.” It shows how portrayal of historical figures and events in the best light for the reputation of United States leads to biased and distorted historical education.
In Graham Swift’s Waterland, Tom Crick says, “Children, it was one of your number, a curly-haired boy called Price… who once… asserted roundly that history was ‘a fairy-tale’… ‘What matters… is the here and now. Not the past… The only important thing about history, I think, sir, is that it’s got to the point where it’s probably about to end’”(6,7). It is very likely that we all have come to a point in our education, at one time or another, where we have encountered sentiments similar to those of Price. In most schools the subject of history is treated more or less in the same way- as a recounting of events, an examination of how the past has led to the present. This seems to be a good definition at first glance, but perhaps it is lacking in that it fails to account for the “here and now”(6). In Waterland Graham Swift not only addresses the problem of the fears his students face in the here and now, and the prospect of a nightmarish future; but, he also gives an unlikely solution in Tom Crick’s theory of history as explanation and personal story.
History is an important element of international studies and its purpose is to compile an accurate representation of the past. The subject of history is often broken into different categories, such as political and diplomatic, economic, labor, cultural and social, intellectual, and environmental history. The past can be discovered or recorded through written, oral, or visual means. While some aspects of history, such as an event and when it took place, may be “set in stone”, causation of an event is often debated between historians. What historians decide upon as fact can change as more evidence comes to light and technology improve analysis techniques.
History is a story told over time. It is a way of recreating the past so it can be studied in the present and re-interpreted for future generations. Since humans are the sole beneficiaries of history, it is important for us to know what the purpose of history is and how historians include their own perspective concerning historical events. The purpose and perspective of history is vital in order for individuals to realise how it would be almost impossible for us to live out our lives effectively if we had no knowledge of the past. Also, in order to gain a sound knowledge of the past, we have to understand the political, social and cultural aspects of the times we are studying.
History is not only a valuable part of knowledge, but opens the door to many other parts, and affords materials to most of the sciences. And indeed, if we consider the shortness of human life, and our limited knowledge, even of what passes in our own time, we must be sensible that we should be forever children in understanding, were it not for this invention, which extends our experience to all past ages, and to the most distant nations; making them contribute as much to our improvement in wisdom, as if they had actually lain under our observation. A man acquainted with history may, in some respect, be said to have lived from the beginning of the world, and to have been making continual additions to his stock of knowledge in every century.
History is the bridge that connects the past with the present. Without history, we have no future. The past gives value to our present. David C. McCullough stated, “History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are”. I agree with McCullough, history gives us a purpose. History allows us to investigate and interpret the past in order to see how we developed and where we came from. We can get an idea of what has influenced our past and present, and also what will shape our future. We can see what previous generations did and whether or not t...
Though our history may bring back horrible memories of the ?grimmest dimensions of human nature? (Limerick 472), it is necessary to have a good historical background. History gives us the ability to improve future outputs, satisfy our unending need for knowledge, and understand how many policies and regulations have come to be. Without history mankind would be very primitive and ununified. Our complete molding of the world today is almost completely dependent on the fact that we study our history. Without history present day humans would be nothing more than cavemen.
When most people think about history they remember a boring class they took in school a long time ago, they recall memorizing important dates, taking map tests, and falling asleep while listening to a lecture. The truth is that history really is an important subject to be teaching students. History is more than just some lecture you receive in class, history lets us look back, see the good things and the bad things, it allows us to learn from our mistakes and prevent such mistakes from happening in the future. Things that happened in the past are still changing things that are happening today. History is needed for everyone, from government leaders down to individuals; everyone has learned one thing or another from history at some point in their life.