Regressive left distorts Black history
FEBRUARY IS NOT A GOOD MONTH IN LABRADOR. — REX MURPHY
Black History Month is upon us. each year, I look forward to recognizing the achievements of black men and women in our communities. but, this time around, I’m asking for your help.
I need help with deciding how to best describe the individuals and organizations among us who are rewriting and misrepresenting black history in order to serve fringe political agendas.
do we call these sowers of discord the far left? Maybe radical progressives? What about Marxists, woke, or social just warriors? Perhaps we can rely on a distinction popularized by counter-extremism advocate Maajid Nawaz: regressive left, as opposed to progressive left?
We must avoid painting with too broad of a brush. I have no desire to pick a fight with folks who support completely defensible progressive policies, like a higher minimum wage or improved investments in health care. but I do want to stand against those on the political left who dishonestly exploit black history for political gain.
robert Woodson, an American civil rights activist and founder of The Woodson Center in Washington, d.c., has been pushing back against regressive efforts to rewrite black history for years. In response to the New york Times “reframing” the founding of the united States as beginning with the practice of slavery in 1619, Woodson launched an initiative called 1776 unites (1776 is when the u.s. declaration of Independence was adopted). Woodson and a team of scholars argue that equating the founding of the united States with slavery, as the New york Times does, is not only historically incorrect, but also communicates “hostile messages that degrade the spiritual, moral and political foundations of our nation.”
Woodson argues that the “radical left” falsely present their political organizations as an extension of past black social movements. With co-author Joshua Mitchell, Woodson wrote in the Wall Street Journal that past black social movements in the u.s. were diverse in their strategies and tactics, “but all emphasized human agency, sought liberation, and rejected despair.” Movements like black Lives Matter stray far from this tradition by “disdaining exhortations toward work, family and faith as ‘respectability politics’ ” and “(giving) up on black America and (encouraging) its needless suffering.”
California provides another example of rewriting black history. The state’s ethnic Studies Model Curriculum for public schools features an article titled bringing black Lives Matter into the Classroom, which calls rosa Parks’ and John Lewis’s nonviolent civil rights movement “docile” and “passive.” A reported six million students will be taught lessons from this curriculum. Former legal counsel and speech writer to Martin Luther King Jr., Clarence Jones, wrote a powerful letter to California Gov. Gavin Newsom denouncing the curriculum for containing “defamatory falsehoods” about black history.
braving through police brutality, fire hoses and German shepherds is far from passive. risking one’s life to organize a bus boycott or March on Washington is not docile. you may ask why a public school curriculum in America’s largest state would make such claims about an iconic nonviolent movement. The relevant article in the curriculum states plainly that educators should be concerned that “prevailing narratives’’ are “condemning louder, more militant tactics.” Apparently, favouring non-violence is controversial in California.
The power to tell the story of where we’ve been allows one to set the mark on where we should go next.
Columbia university’s John Mcwhorter demonstrates this truth when urging universities and other schools to use “their sense of logic, civility, and progress” in responding to activists. In The Atlantic, Mcwhorter claims that some activists’ demands do not recognize past accommodations made for students of colour. boston university’s Ibram X. Kendi offered a critical rebuttal to Mcwhorter’s claims, tweeting that “activists would almost certainly acknowledge the existence of past reforms ... the issue is these institutions still have widespread and pervasive inequities and injustices.”
For both professors, “anti-racism” begins with what we glean from history. If past activism can serve as a blueprint to help overcome current inequalities, then we ought to be skeptical of proposals to dismantle our institutions and our way of life. but, if past activism has left us with little progress, as those who rewrite history tend to insist, then it’s easier for activists to justify their radical proposals in the present day.
I’m still not sure what language to use when describing those who distort black history. regressive left sounds right, but hopefully, you can help me find the right words. yet, I am sure that how we write history matters. And I’m thankful for the men and women whose achievements inspire us each black History Month to keep fighting the good fight.