How Authentic Is The History We Are Taught In School?

Have you ever stopped to wonder if the history we have been told is true? How reliable is it, really?

In today's world of the internet and corporate controlled media, fake news is consumed by the masses without questioning its validity. I often wonder how far back has that practice has been happening.

They say history is written by the victors of past wars which implies that the other side of the story gets forgotten or, at the very least, rewritten to serve the winner's purpose.

Image credit

Before the printing press news was spread across the world by word of mouth, but whose word from who's mouth? Even when the printing press became common the message that was allowed to proliferate was controlled by those in power. Book burning was common and people were killed for writing the wrong books.

Controlling the message that reaches people's ears have been going on since language first began to take shape and today is no different. Even the word history is literally his-story. Who's story. The victors or those in control of the economy or the policy makers of a population?

That word history refers to all time preceding this very moment and everything that really happened up to now. How can we be sure that the story of those events are, in fact, factual and not someone's interpretation of events_

The words story and history have similar backgrounds but we may think of the dividing line as the difference between fact and fiction. A story can even be a bold-faced lie, but history is supposed to be factual, at least in theory.

There are plenty of examples of news media getting caught telling outright lies and embarrassingly eating their words and issuing a retraction. But what about the times they don't get caught. Do their lies then go down in history as facts? How many times do you imagine that has happened?

And when these false facts go unnoticed they then become history as we know it, regurgitated throughout the centuries and taken as a true account of events. Over time there are no living persons that can recall what really happened or offer another account of events. We take it for granted that these so-called facts are true simply because they were written down in a book.

Did you know that in the United States, with few exceptions, it is illegal to print history books unless it is approved by the Texas State Board of Education?

Texas originally acquired its power over the nation’s textbook supply because it paid 100 percent of the cost of all public school textbooks.

Image credit

Recently there has been pushback from other states that want their own story of history taught to their children.

Texas is hardly the only state with small, fierce pressure groups trying to dictate the content of textbooks. California, which has the most public school students, tends to come at things from the opposite side, pressing for more reflection of a crunchy granola worldview. The word in publishing was that for California you wanted no references to fast food, and in Texas, you wanted no references to sex.

The chorus of objections to textbook material mounted. Approval of environmental science books was once held up over board concern that they were teaching children to be more loyal to their planet than their country. As the board became a national story and a national embarrassment, the state legislature attempted to put a lid on the chaos in 1995 by restricting the board’s oversight to “factual errors.” This made a surprisingly little impact when you had a group of deciders who believed that the theory of evolution, global warming, and separation of church and state are all basically errors of fact. credit

The boards that decide what is included or excluded in history books has fifteen members from fifteen districts whose boundaries don’t conform to congressional districts or really anything whatsoever.

This amounts to censorship of history catering to a narrow perspective of what really happened in our past and I'm certain censorship has a history as long as history itself.

There is no reason to believe we have suddenly rid ourselves of censoring or have vowed to give a true accounting of current events. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the narrative is as controlled as ever.

Even the word narrative means a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious. and hints to its incomplete view by containing the word narrow in it, which means of little breadth or width; not broad or wide; not as wide as usual or expected:.

Image credit

So the official narrative is literally a story or account of events of little breadth or width, implying it is not the whole story. It is His-Story. To get the whole story we would need to hear the whole story which we seldom do.

With this in mind, when I hear an account of current events that immediately spread through the mouths of media giants painting a picture with a factual brush, I have to question its validity.

I question why everyone doesn't question it. Are people that brainwashed that they believe everything they hear or read in the news? Do we undervalue the truth so much that we don't even care what the truth is anymore?

One thing for sure, we can't arrive at the truth with a narrow view of events. To get to the truth of anything we need to hear the whole story even if we don't like what we hear. There is more than one side of a story and the truth usually resides somewhere in the middle.

It gets even messier when you realize that people can experience the exact same event taking place in completely different ways. Who's to say one perspective is more valid than another? Apparently, those with the biggest bullhorn can overpower another perspective and there is no bigger bullhorn than the mainstream media.

They have the power to control the narrative of events and they do so with impunity. If they do get caught all they have to to is issue a refraction which they do in whispers and after the damage has been done.

When I was a high school student my history teacher gave us a written assignment to illustrate how history was written which I failed to write. When it was my turn to stand in front of the class and read my report I whispered a short story to the closest person in the first row of the class and asked them to repeat the story in the next person's ear and ask them to do the same.

Each person repeated the story until it traveled through every student and I asked the last student to stand up and repeat the story out loud. The end result was completely different than how it started. "This is how history was written.", I proclaimed feeling proud of myself.

Image credit

The class burst into chaos as each student repeated what they had heard to try and determine where the story had changed and I was sent to the principles office for disrupting the class. I always got in trouble in history class because I often didn't buy the stories they taught us.

My principal thought it was brilliant and made the teacher give me an A-grade on the assignment for thinking outside the box, a move that didn't elicit any praise from my teacher. But it illustrates my point that history is just that, a story, and you either buy it or you don't and no amount of words written in a book or broadcast on a television station make the story told any less narrow.

The very fact that someone is trying to control the narrative should alert us to how weak the story is. Truth does not need to be controlled and there is more to the story than just one view. If we really were interested in learning the truth about something we should welcome every perspective, even the ones we find bothersome.

Debates in the public arena today are as polarized as ever. Stifling true debate means we will never discover the truth about anything. People often react to opposing views so negatively they can't even listen to another view that doesn't resonate with their own, and the media, whose job is to report opposing views in an unbiased manner, seems to be adding fuel to those fires.

This only serves to divide us and cause us to lose sight of any possible resolution or compromise. Today, that seems to be the medias goal. Dividing us in as many ways as possible, turning us against each other and getting their version of the "facts" widely dispersed while suppressing opposing views. It seems so obvious and feels criminal, but perhaps it's just history repeating itself.

The need to control the narrative, as opposed to the need to getting to the truth, is only helpful to those that gain from it, mainly liars. Liars are the only ones who are fearful of the truth and we have no shortage of them throughout history.

Image credit

It's not a burden on one's imagination to conclude that liars want to control the history we are told so they can control what we believe. Even the word *believe^ has the word be-lie in it. Truth is not dependent on what you believe. Something either happened or it did not happen, but if we don't have access to the whole story we never truly know.

This is why I have made it a practice to question everything the media shouts and the louder it shouts it the more I question it. Before coming to any conclusion I listen to opposing views, even the ones I feel strongly opposed to because I value the truth more than my own personal beliefs. If we turn a deaf ear to those with different opinions and only preach to the choir, we will never widen our view enough to come close to anything resembling the truth.

Yes, it's messy, sometimes disturbing, revolting even, but that is how humans are. Nothing is as cut and dry, right or wrong, black or white as the official story. Dig deeper and don't take everything you hear or read at face value.

We all censor and we all try to control the narrative sometimes in unusual ways. Our parents lied to us when they told us there was a Santa Claus, we celebrate the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ by looking for chocolate eggs that a bunny lays in the grass. I've read the bible and nowhere do they mention a bunny or chocolate. We twist the truth to serve our own purpose and fit our current version of reality.

It's human nature to control the information people have access to and that impulse is not going to go away, but just because you hear a story on TV or read it in a book that is proposed to be factual, it does not make it so.

Question Everything

Learn more about Basic Universal Income here