History Textbooks and the Hoover Institution

Poor Cassandra. She lost the argument, and Troy lost the war. She may have had the support of the thoughtful, indeed of the majority, but The System defeated her. It sounds like a modern university. My proposal for a collection of history textbooks, viewed as instruments in the creation of attitudes which lead to war or peace, was generally well received, but The System adduced some strange objections:

"It is a matter for the School of Education, not historians". Nonsense. Historians formed committees to study the problem, just as mathematicians and others formed committees to study textbooks in their fields. Of course, the subject of history textbooks interests not only educators but also political scientists, sociologists, child psychologists, and security specialists. Indeed, it should interest everyone.

"The subject must be left to the professoriate". Of course, but someone has to take the lead. Allegedly, the proposed courses would have to be approved by a university committee. If we were talking about an interdepartmental major yes, but we are simply talking about a joint course, and such courses are common. The departments involved simply crosslist the courses, sometimes with as different number.

Committees are a favorite device to bury proposals. I established the Casa Espaņola, a residence with a high cultural standard. Without a word to me the Administration shut it down and later replaced it with Zapata House, whose ties with the Soviet propaganda machine I documented. I proposed that it be renamed Espinosa House in honor of the founder of Hispanic studies at Stanford or that another residence be established of wider scope. The matter was referred to a committee, and was never heard from again. This is just one example of committees being used as funeral parlors.

We are told that librarians do not regard textbooks as a genre and therefore do not collect them. That was the argument used when the British Library discarded its collection of railroad timetables, which would have been invaluable for the students of nineteenth-century social, economic and industrial development, who came on the scene more recently. It was the argument used when the Library of Congress scrapped its collection of Nazi textbooks. A collection of nineteenth century history textbooks would be of enormous interest, indeed we should go back to the beginning of textbooks.

The whole issue is very much alive. The Italian newspaper La Republica (3/19/01) published an article "Flailing, Japan Rewrites History". The subject has rated very slight attention in the American media. Here are key sentences from the article: "A revisionist history textbook written for Japanese schools has reopened old wounds and sowed distrust and suspicion among Asian neighbors, revealing the disquieting return of nationalism in the land of the Rising Sun. No one is taking the schoolbook issue lightly. There is a Japan Society for History Textbook Reform. Not surprisingly, Asia has reacted with fury, as would Europe if German schools began using books that denied the Holocaust. The textbook issue is a sign of the tensions already about the burst in the Far East".

I call on The System to face reality and not to bury its head in committee or procedural sands.

Ronald Hilton - 5/27/01