[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—The proposed examination of
L.C.C. textbooks with a view to purging them of undesirable propaganda is rather unfairly denounced by The 'Times, Daily Telegraph and, sad to say, The Spectator, as Socialist propaganda—it evidently being thought that Mr. Morrison will put down the mighty from their seats in the history books (which they have occupied too long) and raise up the lowly.
Now, with no disrespect to your good selves, you appear rather naively to believe that our school history books are neutral, above board, unbiassed, free from propaganda, and give the working classes a correct view of history. I am not prepared to admit this. For, as no working-class view of history has yet to my knowledge been written, the over- whelming majority of working people in this country must take their history on trust as written chiefly. by " their betters" —chiefly public school and university men largely out of touch and often out of sympathy with the working classes, and whose attitude and views are consciously or uncon- sciously biassed in favour of a class society. A working- class history written by an educated working man would read very differently from most school history books today.
School history is written up chiefly as a big parade of great monarchs, soldiers and flags. Facts unfavourable to class society—such as the bloodstained, fiery genesis and growth of Capitalism, Enclosures, sufferings of the workers and the like—are glossed over ; whilst favourable facts are over- stressed—most of the books being badly tainted with a " God-bless-the-squire-and - his - relations - and-keep-us-in-our- proper-stations " atmosphere, the working classes being usually depicted as nit-witted Calibans to be guided, cajoled, scolded or flogged as required, and not as people who have by their own efforts fought their way up, and are still doing so.
Little or nothing is told of the correct meaning of the terms labour, land, wealth and capital—an omission which vitiates all school history textbooks. The terrors of British rule in India, Ireland and the Colonies are omitted or soft-pedalled. Predatory wars like the Boer War with its concentration camps and prisoners " shot whilst trying to escape," are shamelessly lied about. Little or nothing is told about the economic reasons for the Reformation and the English Civil War, whilst the American Civil War is represented as a holy war about negro freedom, and not a very unholy -war as to srho should have the rising profits—the North or the South.
These are just a few examples of the misrepresentation of history, and I need not labour the point further beyond asserting that the sins of the council and secondary school history textbooks consist both in commission and omission— omission of either the whole or part of the facts meant as deliberate distortion. And by far the worst omission is that of the economic forces in history.
I write this as one of the working class. Although I was awarded a History distinction in the Matriculation examination some eight years ago, I left school knowing very little accurate history, and believed that the people and forbears of my own class were nit-witted Calibans led by Bolshies. I had to un- learn everything, and begin afresh, consulting sources and books which the ordinary working man does not care to bother about. And so the wrong views stick in his mind.
I think the working classes have a right to fair, unbiassed history teaching. A revision and purging of all school history and textbooks is long overdue. It is to be hoped that the L.C.C. will give the most scrupulous attention to the matter, and*that their example will be followed throughout the -whole country.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
