History Matters

Around three years ago, I read Cornel West’s book Democracy Matters. Though he effectively alternates between praise of American democratic ideals and criticism of modern antidemocratic trends, one passage in the first chapter caught my eye. On page 15, he states “Our democratic tradition has built on the profound democratic impulse that stretches all the way back to the Greeks, and this book will, in part, explore the rich insights and expressions of that deep democratic tradition, from the radical iconoclasm of Socrates, to the tragically schizophrenic visions of the American Founding Fathers, to the exuberant and brilliant indictments laid down by hip-hop.”

To hear the Founding Fathers described in such an unflattering manner actually surprised me at first glance. Throughout grade school, the authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution had always been described to me as the epitome of positive idealism; they were, in effect, infallible. To hear them described as “tragically schizophrenic” without offering any praise to balance their reputations struck me as absurd. Of course, I knew the charge Mr. West had in mind, that being the Founding Fathers’ tolerance of slavery. Being a professor of African-American studies, he has written and lectured extensively on race relations in the United States and around the world. Democracy Matters was a follow up to his previous book Race Matters, and if his intentions weren’t clear enough, he finishes the sentence by praising the modern hip-hop movement as “exuberant and brilliant”.

In my mind, however, his labeling of the Founding Fathers as “tragically schizophrenic”, and nothing more, seemed inappropriate. The fact that slavery was permitted in the fledgling United States was an undeniable mistake; however, to characterize the founders of the United States simply on the basis of their tolerance for slavery does not adequately convey the tremendous effect they have had on human history.

Each person’s view of history is filtered through the lens of their own life experiences. In Cornel West’s case, it is not only his African-American heritage, but also the many years he has spent researching African-American history, that leads him to characterize the American Revolution in such a dualistic manner. I, of course, see things differently; while I take the Founding Fathers’ supposed moral and ethical purity with a grain of salt, I nevertheless think that their net effect on world events was positive. The way in which we view the flow of history helps shape our opinions, and, in turn, affects the actions we may undertake to further our concept of global justice.

That all historical viewpoints are subjective cannot be denied; therefore, any “opinion” I might have on the matter would be largely irrelevant, since changing the way in which history is understood is effectively impossible. But if I had to state an opinion, I would contend that holding a subjective view of history is ultimately counterproductive. While Mr. West, as well as many others, will happily admit that their view of history is skewed towards a certain perspective, I firmly believe that humanity will not achieve true intercultural understanding unless history is presented and interpreted in an unbiased, truthful, and uniform manner. Even if it is a nominally-underrepresented viewpoint, any imbalance or half-truth in conceptual history does not do justice to the actual truth of the situation, and will ultimately distort our understanding of human nature.

Perry Landesberg