Restoration Or Revision?

As The Commercial Appeal reports it, some two dozen or so Tennessee TEA Party supporters want the state’s history curriculum changed.  Specifically, they want slavery and issues with the Native American tribes downplayed as compared to how they’re handled currently.

No portrayal of minority experience in the history which actually occurred shall obscure the experience or contributions of the Founding Fathers, or the majority of citizens, including those who reached positions of leadership.


The thing we need to focus on about the founders is that, given the social structure of their time, they were revolutionaries who brought liberty into a world where it hadn’t existed, to everybody — not all equally instantly — and it was their progress that we need to look at.

As one would expect, the MSM has made a lot of this request to the Tennessee legislature and, as one would also expect, the Liberals and their minority tenants are frothing at the mouth over it.

But are the requests of these TEA Partiers requests for historical revisionism or merely for a restoration of the curriculum as it was before the oikophobic Liberals corrupted the school systems with their own pernicious form of anti-American revisionism?

I know what the history curriculum was when I was in school and I know it didn’t hide the fact that the Founding fathers were slaveholders. It also didn’t make that, or any other societal flaw, the focus of the classes either.

That’s not, however, how history is taught in most states these days. The Liberals got control over the curriculum years ago and shifted it to focus on the negatives instead of the achievements of Americans. I can’t say for sure though that this is case in Tennessee or, if it is, how egregious the current curriculum is.

Restoration or revision? Frankly, I don’t know. Either seems possible.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | |

Leave a Reply