Lies My Teacher Told Me

So, I finally finished the book, "Lies My Teacher Told Me" by James Loewen. Overall, I found the book extremely interesting. Chapters 1 and 2 discuss the topics of hero-making and Christopher Columbus. I found both to be enlightening, and agree with Loewen's assertion that history books try to create heroes out of historical figures -- something that is detrimental to teaching children accurate history. I think it's interesting to note that the Bible is not afraid to show the "dark side" of it's historical figures, and does a superb job of telling the story of God's redemption and plan for the church, despite human failings.

The chapter on Christopher Columbus was especially enlightening. I love how Loewen annually asks his college students, "Who were the first settlers on our continent?" and they routinely get the question wrong. (Remember, the first settlers were actually the native Americans). He also points out the strong possibilities of visits to America by both Africans and Phoenicians, long before even the Vikings who proceeded Columbus. I found it interesting to note his identification of the fact that most people did, indeed, know that the earth was round, that the "discovery" of the Americas was a perspective unique to Europeans, and that Columbus was also at the root of a number of serious human rights violations.

The chapters on the treatment of the natives, slavery and racism were also fascinating. The Civil War (which was really about slavery, not preserving the Union -- ha! ha! to my 7th grade history teacher. You were totally totally wrong!!!) and Reconstruction were presented in a totally different light than my text books growing up, and most that I have perused through as a home schooler. I found especially interesting, the chapter on Abraham Lincoln and John Brown. It was inspiring to read about Lincoln's personal struggle with racism, and that he made the choice to do what was right despite his inner struggle. John Brown was painted as a fascinating individual, who, quite possibly, might be the most interesting "civilian" in American history -- yet painted as a crazy man by textbooks.

By the middle of the book, though, his bias started to show through. The main issue I found was that he insists that America is not a land of equal opportunity -- well, historically that's obvious. However, he tends to blame the system more than the individuals. Any system that supports racism and slavery is a product of the individuals that make up that system. I think personal responsibility makes up a big part of why someone "makes it" or not in this country today. I see this on a daily basis, when my daughters get out of bed, and do there work despite their disabilities. Then I drive downtown and see men begging for money on the road side because they "have no legs and can't work." Seriously, I want to stop the car and lecture those people. The missing legs ain't the reason they're not working!

Anyway, he goes to blaming "the system" far too quickly. You can't deny that people here have overcome tremendous odds, something that just can't happen in many places in the world, no matter how diligent or tenacious someone is. While I do believe racism is still an issue in this country, I think that, like disability rights, it's gone beyond the system and it's an issue of changing people's thoughts and hearts. People do move from class to class in this country -- I think of my own family where my grandfather and grandmother were not college educated people, yet raised both their children to be college-educated professionals and now, collectively, all 7 of their grandchildren are as well. I think the vast majority of the reason that people don't "make it" here has less to do with systematic injustice and more to do with personal habits, laziness and priorities, as well as thought patterns and practices that take generations to change.


However, he points out that textbooks try to portray America as a place where everyone is middle class, which is, of course, not true. But to that I would also say that while I have been personally involved with some children who are very poor and live in situations that are far from healthy, I can walk the streets of my city and not have 2 and 3 year-olds come up begging. No, everyone is not middle class. But, there is definitely more here for the impoverished than elsewhere in the world.

In addition to that, is the "American dream" that everybody should be rich, or is it that everybody should have the opportunity to provide for their family in a safe and healthy way?

At the end of the book, he had an interesting section on the use of history textbooks for the purpose of "socialization" of our students. I found this fascinating. The books are written to create nice little patriotic students who can list dates, recite all the great things America has done (and exclude the not-so-nice stuff like our involvement in the Phillipines and the Mexican-American War or some of our involvement in Haiti not long after the American Revolution). They also like to down play slavery, and bias against women and racism to produce a nice "Godly" nation that we will all love and serve. The Iraq War, especially, is ill treated -- much in the manner of the actual war itself!

After reading the book, I'm even more thankful that God has led our family to home school. I have never liked what I've seen in secular history textbooks, and most that I've seen published by Christian publishing companies err in the opposite direction. For now, we read history from "living books" (historical fiction, biographies, topical books etc) and plan to use primary sources for the upper grades. What could be a subject that prompts great thinking has really been reduced to various types of indoctrination.

"Lies My Teacher Told Me" -- I give it two thumbs up!

The Socialism of Helen Keller

Several days ago I was shocked into reading a book entitled, "Lies My Teachers Told Me: Everything Your High School History Textbook Got Wrong" by James Loewen. I have to admit, the title did snare me. After all, I am a Home School Mom and I just love it when text books, which are, in my opinion, the archrival to learning, are proven wrong. However, it wasn't just the title that lured me in, it was the first chapter. Right off the bat, Dr. Loewen smacked me with a sentence that just floored me.

"The truth is that Helen Keller was a radical socialist."

What? Helen Keller was a socialist? How incredibly anti-American! How ungodly! How scandalous! How interesting! An image of her sitting in a rocking chair, by a warm cozy fire, reading her braille edition of "The Communist Manifesto" popped into my mind -- an image I'd never thought could even exist, let alone be conjured in my mind. My world had been rocked, and now I was hooked. I had to read the rest of this book.

However, first I had to understand how, and if truly, Helen Keller was a socialist. It was something that wasn't hard to verify, as the woman was not only a member of the communist party in the U. S., but towards the end of her life wrote letters to a friend who was incarcerated for her communist activities. Apparently Keller was outspokenly socialist in her early adult years, but then moved her socialist activities to the back burner for her later years, as being an advocate for the blind was placed in the front. Wow. You learn something new everyday.

Dr. Loewen's reason for including Helen Keller's socialism interested me, because he has a good point. Most people think of Helen Keller as someone who miraculously overcame her incredibly difficult disabilities. Indeed, I have spoken to my children often about Helen Keller, because she is a great role model for not only my girls, but my boys (whose disabilities include an inability to carry multiple items at once, and problem solve such things as "Where did I put my shoes? How can you expect me to find them when I don't know where I put them?").

Yet, as Dr. Loewen points out, what did Helen Keller do after she overcame her disability and graduated from Radcliffe?

Good question. I realized that I had no idea. Here, for all these years, I've been touting Helen Keller to my children, and self, as a great person who overcame her disability and I had no idea what exactly she did once she overcame her disability. Well, according to Loewen, it's because after she overcame her disability, she became a socialist -- something text books don't really like about her, so they just happen to leave out the 60+ years of her life after overcoming her disability.

Why didn't this ever occur to me?

According to Loewen and several other sources I read (including her obituary) , Keller's socialism grew out of her righteous anger over the treatment of the working class in America when she learned that a large portion of the blindness in this nation came from work related accidents due to unsafe working conditions.

I would grant that now, especially after the fall of the Soviet Union, and seeing, first hand, the fruit of communism, we know that socialism is a baseless idea, chalk full of fallacies and doesn't even begin to factor in the effects of sinful human nature on a society. It seems ridiculous that anyone would believe that socialism would work, although there are professing Christians who believe as strongly in capitalism as Keller did socialism, and capitalism isn't exactly God's economy either. But, I digress.

What is interesting, though, is that no one does mention that Keller was a socialist. According to Loewen, and I have to agree, this is because textbooks, and other teaching aids I might add, want to create "heros". Someone over coming their disability is a hero. Someone doing that and then becoming a socialist is not a hero. However, in creating "heros" some of the truth gets left out, and a myth is created or there is some insight lost because of it. I don't like the creating of heros, because I only want there to be one hero in my life: Jesus.

Is Helen Keller any less amazing because of her political views? I would say no. After the shock wore off, Helen Keller became more human to me. She wasn't a genius, she wasn't an infallible saint. She was an amazing woman who lived a full life and didn't get everything right. It helps me to think, "Perhaps I can do some good, even though I don't get everything right..." After all, I don't want any other heros, but I do want people I can look up to, and take encouragement from, even when I know that they were a bit wacky. And, I would rather my children understand the errant nature of man from the start, so they don't get disappointed in the truth when they're older and hit with it.

In my opinion, Helen Keller did what so many Christians over the centuries have done. She put her faith in changing the system rather than in God. While God can use the "system" to bring change, it's our job to follow his calling to obedience in our own actions. Of course, perhaps Keller would say joining the communist party was God's calling in her life. Ohhhh.... that's wild.

So, it turns out that Keller was an active socialist and writer. She lived off the royalties of her story (along with her teacher) until people lost interest in her book. She almost married once, to a nice socialist man, but her mom hit the roof and kicked the man out her life. Then, when the money ran out, she did a very successful circuit on vaudeville. Although many were offended, she and her teacher did a re-enactment of her story. With interesting people, the scandals just don't cease.

Now, the next question to tackle. How did Keller reconcile her Christianity with her socialism? I would imagine that this very question is why Christians have been more-than-happy to overlook Keller's socialism. It's just so messy, (just like the fact that she was a Swedenborgian, and never committed to a local church -- maybe if she had she would've put her socialist efforts towards a better cause?) but, I agree with Dr. Loewen, it's the controversy, the "mess", that makes it all so interesting.