Russ Douthat on Critical Race Theory

[Bootstrap]

Let's take a concrete case.

You are teaching American History to a high school class, public or private or Mennonite or whatever you prefer. The students are juniors and seniors. This week, you need to teach about Thomas Jefferson. What do you say about Sally Hemmings? What do you say about slaves? What do you say about Monticello? Do you say anything about his wealth and elite social network? Do you say anything about his religious views? If so, what?

When you teach the Declaration of Independence, do you discuss the tension between saying that "all men are created equal" and owning human beings as slaves? Clearly, his words have been a major force for democracy and freedom. But weren't they more fully realized when slavery was abolished and everyone came to be more equal under the law? When you teach about Jefferson's groundbreaking work for religious freedom, do you also mention that Jefferson denied the virgin birth and the resurrection of Jesus and the miracles that Jesus did?

To me, Jefferson is a very complex figure who accomplished great things and was also a bit hypocritical about some of the same great things he promoted. Without Jefferson, we would be less free, but that does not make him perfect. I think we need to tell this bit of history in all of its complexity.

I think the good things that Jefferson started become much more real when "all men are created equal" translates into "all men and women are treated equally". That was a much longer time coming. But I imagine it would have taken even longer without Jefferson.

[Falco Underhill]

There's no need to discuss Jefferson's hypocrisy and tell his story according to a socialist narrative. Jefferson said plenty about his position as a slave-owner and it's contradiction with the ideals of the DOI and his own reasons for not freeing the slaves immediately, etc. His story would be better off told in his own words and the narrative sticking close to it rather than wildly speculating about his hypocrisy and spinning it all according to a socialist narrative, which falsies it, imo.

Whether the allegations of his relationship with Sally Hemmings is really settled or not, I doubt it, but I'm not really sure what benefit it would bring into the classroom, anyway.

Should we chase down all the lurid details of all JFK's one night stands, and look into the closet of FDR, too, etc?

[Bootstrap]

There's no need to discuss Jefferson's hypocrisy and tell his story according to a socialist narrative. Jefferson said plenty about his position as a slave-owner and it's contradiction with the ideals of the DOI and his own reasons for freeing the slaves immediately, etc. His story would be better off told in his own words and the narrative sticking close to it rather than wildly speculating about his hypocrisy and spinning it all according to a socialist narrative, which falsies it, imo.

Falco, that's not the question. I was asking what you would teach. I don't think anything I would teach would be a "socialist narrative". Douthat also seems to believe that some of the things CRT people are saying we should teach are compatible with what he sees as a patriotic narrative that tells the full story. So if we drop the partisan positioning and labeling .... what would you teach in your classroom?

If you quote Jefferson in his own words, do you quote things like this?

I consider a woman who brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the farm. What she produces is an addition to the capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption.

Do you then have a conversation about viewing people as capital and Jefferson's breeding programs for slaves? I think that's easy to show from his own records. Do you consider that compatible with "all men are created equal"?

What do you say about Sally Hemmings?

[Ken]

Actually a good teacher isn’t going to spoon-feed their class any particular narrative about Jefferson or any other similar historical figure. A good teacher will teach critical thinking and historical methods and encourage their students to engage with the source material. Some students will take things in a particular direction, others in a different direction. The important thing is that exhibiting critical thinking, learning to analyze material, learning how to compose historical arguments, etc. American history is vast. I don’t think there is any specific canon that all students need to master with respect to Jefferson or any other historical figure or event. Core events and seminal figures, yes they should be aware of. But the skills to evaluate any historical figure or event on their own are more important.

Students should be able to ask the same critical questions about any historical figure.

What are they notable or notorious for?
What are their political philosophies?
How were they a product of their times (context?)
What were their blind spots, failings, or inconsistencies?
What contributions did they make to the world in which we live today?
What are the best source materials for studying this particular individual?
How has historical opinion of this individual changed over time?
Who is making arguments about this individual and what is their agenda for doing so?
Etc. etc. etc.

And they should be able to do that for any historical individual whether it is Jefferson, Columbus, Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, etc.

And they should be able to do the same for any historical event, although the questions will obviously be different.

A lot of the discussion about school curriculum gets way too wrapped up into content and not nearly enough about critical thinking. There are endless debates in state legislatures and state education agencies about state curriculum standards for teaching things like climate change, evolution, the civil war, racism, slavery, capitalism, socialism, etc. etc. When most of it largely misses the point. Students aren’t passive vessels to be filled up with a set of facts that favor one particular viewpoint or another. We live in a world in which unimaginably quantities of information are available at our fingertips 24/7. Student should be taught how to think for themselves and evaluate information critically. That, more than anything else is what we need in the 21st Century.

[Falco Underhill]

If you quote Jefferson in his own words, do you quote things like this?

I consider a woman who brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the farm. What she produces is an addition to the capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption.

Do you then have a conversation about viewing people as capital and Jefferson's breeding programs for slaves? I think that's easy to show from his own records. Do you consider that compatible with "all men are created equal"?

I think I'd leave that question like that and let the students consider it and decide for themselves. It's a philosophical question that could probably be answered by different think tanks from different perspectives who wouldn't agree.

Why do you feel you need to provide one absolutely correct answer for the students?




.

[Falco Underhill]

Besides, quite frankly, I have no idea what he's saying. So, I'm presuming you do?

What does he mean that a child is an addition to the capital? I understand labor, and I understand capital, but what exactly is this "addition to the capital?"

[Ken]

Besides, quite frankly, I have no idea what he's saying. So, I'm presuming you do?

What does he mean that a child is an addition to the capital? I understand labor, and I understand capital, but what exactly is this "addition to the capital?"

Slaves were the largest single form of capital in the pre Civil War United States. Worth more than all the other forms forms of economical capital such as farm land, factories, railroads, shipping etc. that existed in the country.

That is what he was talking about. Breeding slave children as industrial capital as if they were hogs or cattle.

From James McPherson’s seminal history Battle Cry of Freedom

...by 1860, there were more millionaires (slaveholders all) living in the lower Mississippi Valley than anywhere else in the United States. In the same year, the nearly 4 million American slaves were worth some $3.5 billion, making them the largest single financial asset in the entire U.S. economy, worth more than all manufacturing and railroads combined. So, of course, the war was rooted in these two expanding and competing economies—but competing over what? What eventually tore asunder America's political culture was slavery's expansion into the Western territories

[Bootstrap]

Actually a good teacher isn’t going to spoon-feed their class any particular narrative about Jefferson or any other similar historical figure. A good teacher will teach critical thinking and historical methods and encourage their students to engage with the source material. Some students will take things in a particular direction, others in a different direction. The important thing is that exhibiting critical thinking, learning to analyze material, learning how to compose historical arguments, etc. American history is vast. I don’t think there is any specific canon that all students need to master with respect to Jefferson or any other historical figure or event. Core events and seminal figures, yes they should be aware of. But the skills to evaluate any historical figure or event on their own are more important.

Students should be able to ask the same critical questions about any historical figure.

What are they notable or notorious for?
What are their political philosophies?
How were they a product of their times (context?)
What were their blind spots, failings, or inconsistencies?
What contributions did they make to the world in which we live today?
What are the best source materials for studying this particular individual?
How has historical opinion of this individual changed over time?
Who is making arguments about this individual and what is their agenda for doing so?
Etc. etc. etc.

And they should be able to do that for any historical individual whether it is Jefferson, Columbus, Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, etc.

And they should be able to do the same for any historical event, although the questions will obviously be different.

I agree with this. If you let the students do their own research, they will come in with different perspectives, and the best thing to do is to let them discuss, agree, disagree, debate, and really come to terms with these different perspectives.

[Josh]

Actually a good teacher isn’t going to spoon-feed their class any particular narrative about Jefferson or any other similar historical figure. A good teacher will teach critical thinking and historical methods and encourage their students to engage with the source material. Some students will take things in a particular direction, others in a different direction. The important thing is that exhibiting critical thinking, learning to analyze material, learning how to compose historical arguments, etc. American history is vast. I don’t think there is any specific canon that all students need to master with respect to Jefferson or any other historical figure or event. Core events and seminal figures, yes they should be aware of. But the skills to evaluate any historical figure or event on their own are more important.

Students should be able to ask the same critical questions about any historical figure.

What are they notable or notorious for?
What are their political philosophies?
How were they a product of their times (context?)
What were their blind spots, failings, or inconsistencies?
What contributions did they make to the world in which we live today?
What are the best source materials for studying this particular individual?
How has historical opinion of this individual changed over time?
Who is making arguments about this individual and what is their agenda for doing so?
Etc. etc. etc.

And they should be able to do that for any historical individual whether it is Jefferson, Columbus, Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, etc.

And they should be able to do the same for any historical event, although the questions will obviously be different.

I agree with this. If you let the students do their own research, they will come in with different perspectives, and the best thing to do is to let them discuss, agree, disagree, debate, and really come to terms with these different perspectives.

Unless, of course, they come to the “wrong” perspectives and conclusions.

[Falco Underhill]

Besides, quite frankly, I have no idea what he's saying. So, I'm presuming you do?

What does he mean that a child is an addition to the capital? I understand labor, and I understand capital, but what exactly is this "addition to the capital?"

Slaves were the largest single form of capital in the pre Civil War United States. Worth more than all the other forms forms of economical capital such as farm land, factories, railroads, shipping etc. that existed in the country.

That is what he was talking about. Breeding slave children as industrial capital as if they were hogs or cattle.

From James McPherson’s seminal history Battle Cry of Freedom

...by 1860, there were more millionaires (slaveholders all) living in the lower Mississippi Valley than anywhere else in the United States. In the same year, the nearly 4 million American slaves were worth some $3.5 billion, making them the largest single financial asset in the entire U.S. economy, worth more than all manufacturing and railroads combined. So, of course, the war was rooted in these two expanding and competing economies—but competing over what? What eventually tore asunder America's political culture was slavery's expansion into the Western territories

This is what I recommend for the textbooks, after telling things exactly as it is.

Students must draw a giant T on a blank sheet of paper.

On one side list all the things you disapprove of about Thomas Jefferson.
On the other side write all the good things you can think of about Thomas Jefferson.

Okay, next chapter.