Tag: us history
Justice Thomas Delivers 'Historically Illiterate' Speech Berating Progressives

Justice Thomas Delivers 'Historically Illiterate' Speech Berating Progressives

When Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall announced his retirement in 1991 and President George H.W. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas, he wanted the seat to be held by another Black justice. Marshall was an historic figure: Appointed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967, he was the first Black justice in the High Court's history.

But Thomas, now 77, was a major departure from Marshall in terms of judicial philosophy. While Marshall (who passed away in 1993) was decidedly liberal, Thomas is a far-right social conservative. And over the years, he had strong disagreements with not only the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but also, with retired libertarian/conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Thomas looked back on U.S. history during a speech on Wednesday night, April 15, at the University of Texas-Austin Law School, arguing that progressive politics are incompatible with the Declaration of Independence. But The New Republic's Matt Ford, in an article published on April 17, argues that Thomas got history wrong in multiple ways.

Thomas told attendees, "As we meet today, it is unclear whether these principles will endure. At the beginning of the 20th Century, a new set of first principles of government was introduced into the American mainstream. The proponents of this new set of first principles, most prominently among them the 28th president, Woodrow Wilson, called it progressivism. Since Wilson's presidency, progressivism has made many inroads in our system of government and our way of life. It has coexisted uneasily with the principles of the Declaration. Because it is opposed to those principles, it is not possible for the two to coexist forever."

But according to Ford, Thomas' take on U.S. history is wildly inaccurate.

"Thomas is correct that progressivism was introduced around the turn of the 20th Century, that Woodrow Wilson was the 28th president, and that Wilson was a progressive," Ford explains. "The historical accuracy ends there. Presenting Wilson as the inventor of progressivism is historically illiterate, akin to saying that Joseph Stalin invented communism or that Ronald Reagan invented conservatism. In reality, the progressive era emerged in the 1890s from the corruption and excesses of the Gilded Age."

Ford continues, "A broad range of activists, journalists, legislators, and judges challenged the societal ills that had emerged from the nation's rapid industrialization…. I'm sure that Wilson would have liked to claim credit for inventing the progressive movement, but he was one figure in a much larger social and political ecosystem. Republicans and Democrats alike both supported the movement and its reforms, and the first president to embrace it was actually Theodore Roosevelt."

Ford argues that for Thomas, it is "rhetorically advantageous to make" Wilson "the standard-bearer of progressivism" because he "was perhaps the most racist person to hold the presidency between Andrew Johnson and Donald Trump."

"It allows certain conservative intellectuals to adopt the guise of anti-racism while simultaneously opposing the civil rights laws passed decades after Wilson died," Ford notes. "I bring all of this up not to defend Wilson himself, but to point out the importance of getting history correct."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet


New Study Finds Textbooks Minimize Role Of Labor Movement

The start of the school year in much of the country usually coincides with Labor Day, but a new study finds that many students are largely unaware of the role of the labor movement in U.S. history.

The Albert Shanker Institute, in cooperation with the American Labor Studies Center, conducted a survey of four major textbooks that dominate the U.S. history text market. The report, “American Labor In U.S. History: How Labor’s Story Is Distorted In High School Textbooks,” found that the major texts downplay and ignore significant advances and accomplishments by the labor movement. Instead of focusing on the importance of union activism in passing social protections like the eight-hour workday and occupational safety standards, the books portrayed labor in a more negative light. When labor was mentioned, the books emphasized strikes and associated violence without exploring the situations and working conditions that led to the protests.

According to AFT and Albert Shanker Institute President Randi Weingarten,

“This report explains why so few Americans know much about labor’s history and contributions. It paints a devastating picture of distortion and omission. Too often, labor’s role in U.S. history is misrepresented, downplayed, or ignored. The result is that most American students have little sense of how the labor movement changed the lives of Americans for the better. A vital piece of U.S. history is disappearing before our eyes. … The central argument of this report is not simply to plead for equal treatment for labor in history textbooks. It is that American history itself is incomplete and inaccurate without labor history. Textbooks that leave out or slant labor history simply aren’t fully reflecting our nation’s history.”

These findings exacerbate the negative depictions of unions by many mainstream media outlets. A poll conducted by Phi Delta Kappa and Gallup last month found that 68 percent of people hear more bad stories than good stories about teachers, who are mostly unionized, in the media. Additionally, 47 percent believe the unionization of teachers has hurt the quality of a public education, compared to only 26 percent who say it has helped.

The sponsors of the Shanker study hope their findings will encourage textbook publishers to provide a more accurate portrayal of labor’s contributions. They will send letters requesting meetings with the four publishers in question — Harcourt/Holt, Houghton Mifflin/McDougal, McGraw Hill/Glencoe, and Pearson/Prentice Hall — so that students will be exposed to straightforward facts about labor and create better-informed opinions based on history, instead of relying on biased reports in the media and elsewhere.

Although the study examined textbooks from 2009-10, the authors said that such anti-labor bias in books dates back to at least the New Deal era and has been documented by scholars since the 1960s. But as the national dialogue about unions grows even more tense, there is a greater need for more accurate information and appreciation of the labor movement.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World