Britain’s relationship with history is “not fit for purpose”, according to leading historian David Olusoga. He argues that generations of pupils have been routinely brainwashed by teachers determined to ignore Britain’s ignoble past and exclusively focus on the virtuous episodes in our national story. This, of course, is an inaccurate characterisation.
However, I fear that similar sentiments are behind the recent finding that eight in 10 secondary schools are changing their history lessons to focus more on diversity and ‘social justice’.
This would entail, inter alia, devoting more time to the study of black historical experiences, the Islamic and Mughal empires and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Some believe, however, such as former schools minister Nick Gibb and Alan Smithers, Professor of Education at Buckingham University, that such an approach unavoidably reduces the amount of time spent on British history.
But should they be concerned about a teacher-led push to raise awareness of – and give agency to – minority groups and their contributions to British and global history?
Well, as a history teacher at a state secondary school, my reflexive response has to be no, they shouldn’t be concerned, as long as pupils are taught within the wider context of our shared island story. Indeed, learning about waves of migration to Britain, black Tudors, the contributions of African-Caribbean and Asian soldiers to the global and colonial wars of the 20th century, and the intractable and ongoing conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, complements the existing curriculum by introducing new perspectives that enrich and deepen understanding.
Moreover, any addition that challenges the puerile non-sequitur that the British empire was uniquely evil by framing it within the context of other imperial hegemons, notably the Islamic and Mughal empires, has to be a good thing.
However, the oft used term ‘decolonise’ to describe these changes raises two nagging concerns. First, are they going to be used to inaccurately portray Britain as uniquely evil? Will the Islamic empire be accurately portrayed as a racist, unequal and intolerant entity that enslaved black Africans, as well as a technologically advanced economic and military superpower? Will the Malian kingdom be represented as anything other than an Edenic utopia before the arrival of the avaricious Europeans? In short, could these changes be neatly summed up as ‘Occident (especially Britain) bad; Orient good’? Such concerns may of course be unfounded, but I can’t help but smell the whiff of a trite, reductionist political agenda behind these proposed changes.
To make sure this isn’t the case, school leaders should oversee such changes with great care, as must Ofsted. We can’t allow schools to become woke madrassas where children are taught to despise their own country. On the contrary, they should be encouraged to objectively examine the good and bad chapters in our long national story – in the context of European and global developments – and tentatively make their own moral judgements, uninfluenced by their teachers’ views.
My second concern chimes with that of Alan Smithers. These changes will ineluctably lead to less time being spent on British history. Now, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing – learning about foreign peoples is incredibly valuable, giving context to the British experience as well as providing important insights into human nature and development. It’s also something that we already do. But it’s a question of extent. Teaching and learning British history must take precedence over the study of other nations and peoples.
“But why should we prioritise British history?” I hear you ask. The short answer is because it is our story and an integral part of our identity, whether we realise it or not.
This is true of every country. The nation state is the optimal solution to our innate tribalism, uniting into a single people those who might otherwise break apart along ethnic or regional or ideological lines. It provides mutual defence and support to a mass of people who share, or come to share, a common story with its distinctive customs and way of life. Furthermore, for a democracy to exist at all, a demos must exist – a people or nation with a shared identity. In sum, the nation state is essential to individual prosperity, security and liberty.
Learning the story of your nation therefore tells you about your place in that shared history, as part of that people, whether a new arrival or long established. It gives you moral, social and cultural moorings, engendering pride and a mature acceptance that the ambiguity and complexity that punctuate our history render moral judgements intensely difficult, though not impossible. Through the fascinating history of our evolving socio-cultural, economic and political institutions, pupils will be taught to know and respect the country in which they live, giving rise to benign notions of citizenship and shared responsibility.
That said, if secondary schools teach new aspects of British history that include the contribution of minority groups and contextualise Britain’s empire alongside that of others, thereby shedding new light on our role as citizens of the world as well as citizens of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, then I’m all for it. If, on the other hand, woke teachers contrive to misrepresent Britain as a uniquely racist and evil country, something that David Olusoga is wont to do, or plan to do away with the emphasis on Britain’s island story, leaving children unmoored and lacking a sense of belonging, I’m profoundly opposed.
This development needs to be carefully monitored.
Wesley Smith is a writer and teacher living in London.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The History curriculum seems to have been unanchored for years. My kids spent more time studying Native Americans, which was interesting but not overly relevant to their place in the world. The history of medicine, pretty dull, and needle making. They’d have preferred Kings & Queens, wars & battles.
Sorry, don’t give a flying fig what BBC “historian” David Olusoga thinks what should be taught in history lessons.
Completely irrelevant.
Stick to making your 2nd rate historical “documentaries” for your metropolitan elite friends to fawn over.
TLDR: What a load of shite!
“Britain’s relationship with history not fit for purpose”, say someone born in Nigeria.
The Just for Oil activists have been “bigged up” by millionaire F1 racing driver Sir Lewis Hamilton
” I love that people are fighting for the planet and we need more people like them”, he said without the slightest hint of irony, sarcasm or embarrassment.
Obviously, millionaire Knights of the realm who travel by private jet and make their money burning enough fuel in a few minutes that would last a normal bloke a year are the people with their finger on the pulse of the nation.
Unlike the person stuck on the motorway behind these sat down clowns getting their tea and cake from the coppers.
David, Sir Lewis…..any chance of just shutting the f*** up!?
Maybe a history lesson on post Independence Nigeria and the Biafra war of the 1960’s, when thousands of people starved due a blockade by the Nigerian government? What about the complicity of African tribal leaders who sold their captives into servitude to the Arab nations, other African nations and the transatlantic slave trade?
That’s the thing about Olusoga and his like though; the narrative they would wish to promote is more unbalanced and biased than the traditional one.
Love him or loathe him, a proper historian like David Starkey, (or the guy Neil Oliver had on GB News Saturday, apologies, forgot his name), would rightly explain that British history is much more nuanced and complicated than simply “empire bad”.
People like Olusoga for example will never mention the fact that in effectively ending the slave trade in the face of opposition from other colonial powers, Britain suffered a huge detriment in terms of lives and money.
That’s before you even get into the aspect of judging people’s actions and morals from the past in the context of the present. Zeitgeist is everything.
It isn’t as if there has only ever been the British Empire in history. Rome, Greece, Persian, Chinese, Dutch, French, etc.
I have visited Kenya twice, in the mid 1970s and the early 1990s. They were like two different countries. The first visit was to a prosperous country with improving infrastructure and a booming agricultural sector. The second visit had none of the above; everything was falling apart.
An editorial in ‘The Nation’ contrasted the states of repair in a number of ex British colonies, including Kenya, all of which had fallen into disrepair since independence was granted. In summary they asked if the British could come back.
“He argues that generations of pupils have been routinely brainwashed by teachers determined to ignore Britain’s ignoble past and exclusively focus on the virtuous episodes in our national story. This, of course, is an inaccurate characterisation.”
It’s not an “inaccurate characterisation.” It’s a massive lie.
I note that of the ten children in the picture (from the current remake of the Midwich Cuckoos, set in a small English village), maybe four of them are white. It’s utterly, utterly relentless.
To be in the correct proportion for the UK, at least 8 of them should be white.
I live near a rural primary school. All the pupils are white.
Your area must obviously be urgently decolonised by mass immigration of politically appropriate people of colour from distant countries!
:->
Don’t worry it’ll happen sooner rather than later!
History lessons should be about history. Not about teaching contemporary morals with the help of values judgements about episodes of the past selected because they lend themselves to the kind of value judgements one would like to make. Someone who’s talking about Britains ignoble past is no historian, just a contemporary wokeist singing the well known You’re either black or dreck! tune in front of a semi-historic scenery.
To address one of Olusoga’s actual points: He claims that British history teachers had failed
him (and – by extension – other black Britons) by teaching him a lot more about cotton mills in Lancashire than about the fate of the people who worked on the plantations this cotton came from. He then incorrectly states that these were living and dying in chains and tries to establish (by allusion) British historical guilt because the owners of these cotton mills profitted from operating them. That these were a tiny minority of the people associated with the cotton industry while majority were poor workers and their families living in conditions which were – at best – slightly better than those of the enslaved plantations workers in the American south is something he conveniently ignores.
The profited from it is classical wokery: The cotton mill owners of the 19th century didn’t source their raw material according to current standards for ethically acting businesses! That is, they didn’t chose to go out of business for not having any raw material to work with. Shame unto them! This kind of retrofitting the present onto the past is completely inappropriate for a historian.
His main argument is just nonsense: Cotton plantations in the southern states of the USA are not part of British history but part of American history. He again shows himself as died-in-the-wool (BLM) wokey here: According to him, it’s inappropriate that British history is taught in British schools, they should be teaching American history instead, in particular, the (fairly small) part of American history which the BLMists like most because it’s their very raison d’etre.
Well said!!
Thank you. But I think it’s actually pretty clumsy. But logically valid.
Of course school wills never teach the present day and historical evil of the Chinese Communist Party
Dr. Steve Mosher: ‘500 Million’ Chinese Killed By The ‘Totalitarian’ CCP
https://rumble.com/v1aujnk-dr.-steve-mosher-500-million-chinese-killed-by-the-totalitarian-ccp.html
Bannons War Room
Stand for Freedom – Yellow Boards By The Road
Tuesday 5th July 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction B3408 London Rd &
John Nike Way, Binfield
Bracknell RG42 4FZ
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10.30am to 11.30am
make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Henley
Mills Meadows (bandstand) RG9 1DS
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Too late Wesley.
If it isn’t wokery it is some other current left wing fad. its been goung on for decades. Even teachers and lecturers are frightened to raise a voice of complaint.
David Olusoga? Born in Lagos, Nigeria – I’ll take no lectures from him, he, they. When in Rome……..
Sorry never heard of either of these guys but I know which one I would prefer teaching generations of children in this country and no it’s not the BBC man. But then nothing good seems to come out of the BBC nowadays.
Good article Mr Smith keep up the good work you should join forces with Calvin Robinson also a fine educationalist with a sound mind.