The 1619 Project
Nikole Hannah-Jones
It has been said, “History is written by the winners”. Having studied and taught World and US History, Political Science, and International Affairs for longer than I care to admit, I would edit that to read, History is written, edited, taught, mythologized and internalized by the winners. It becomes our national imaginaries, how we see ourselves and, therefore, very hard to change or maybe even question. This book is evidence, however, that the losers also have a history that is carried with them, a way that they too see themselves and their country. I believe that when the winners ignore the history of others, they do so to their own detriment. For good or bad the losers’ history percolates beneath the surface. It may emerge in bits or break through in the established culture, sometimes subtly and unnoticed - sometimes aggressively challenging the status quo.
The marginalized have always “written” their history. In the past it had been easier for the winners to control it, either burying it or absorbing useful bits into the popular imaginary. In our technological era, though, most anyone can be heard. The history of the marginalized can be shared globally before it is buried, reworked or conveniently absorbed. It sets there for all to see as an alternative account of what has transpired, as a contrast to the history written by the winners.
What do we do with this history of the marginalized, the history that may conflict with the myth we have created? It can no longer be ignored. Do we,
-Label it a lie?
-Call it a distortion of the truth?
-Acknowledge it but suggest that it will be too problematic to teach it or create public
policy to positively address it?
-Treat it with as much validity as the history written by the winners and attempt to deal
positively with it?
I used to teach my students that everyone has a national imaginary about their country. It has developed from the history they were taught and experienced as they grew and gained greater experiences. It drives individuals’ attitudes and level of public participation whether that be in civic matters, ideas about culture, community involvement, global attitudes, attitudes about the natural world, or economic perspectives., possibly even in religion. It is not infrequent that we encounter others who face a dissonance between their personal imaginary, history and that created by winners. How we respond to those who have another history to tell will, I think, play a large role in how successfully we increase or decrease the well-being of ourselves, and our fellow citizens, both in our own country and in the world.
