The Wall_Spring 2023_Issue 9

“History belongs in the past; but understanding it is the duty of the present”. - Shashi Tharoor

“Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe” - H.G Wells

Odessa Lidstrom , LVI, (she/her), discusses the potential detriment of so called ‘wokeism’ in historical education, and the importance of disagreement and debate.

There is a great concern, particularly from older generations, over the growth and spread of so-called ‘wokeism’ in the media, education, and society.This concern extends to the teaching of history to current and future generations, as the communication of the past greatly depends on the situation of the present. own, the social climate is one of development, evolution, progressiveness, and modernity. Most wish to remain politically correct wherever possible and are interested in the future young people of our country learning the sordid history of inequity and oppression, which remains relevant even today.This knowledge is intrinsic to the understanding of the present; many marginalised groups, both previously and currently subject to a form of persecution, appreciate this transparency with the past and are understandably adamant for the wrongdoings to be documented, taught, and learned from. The obvious benefit of this is the reduced risk of unfortunate repetition as well as the due respect awarded to those In aWestern nation such as our

affected.

The concern held over this potential ‘over-progression’ in the teaching of history is not unfounded - we merely must look at the treatment of current affairs and individuals in the media. Cancel culture has seeped into our lives and has therefore created a shared mentality of intolerance toward other perspectives. Opinion on current affairs is more saturated and potent than on historical situations; however, if this progression persists, a similar occurrence could become reality in historical education. Disagreement is imperative in history; without it, we are left with a one-sided debate that does not truly delve into the subject matter and reveals nothing of the past. We cannot afford for a narrower side of the debate to be taught to the younger generations. Less will be learnt, and a decreased diversity of opinion will be heard.We must maintain the factual, objective nature of history and not allow the subject to be over-politicised. It has progressed to a positive point, but how much further will it go?

This is evidence of the good that

has come from social progression in historical education; however, this positive trajectory is at risk.What harm could the development of social sensitivity in the teaching of history possibly have? Many ask this question, as surely ‘progression’ means holistic improvement. However, a key feature of the subject of history is its unique blend of fact and opinion.A ‘progressed’ method of teaching history may lead to the introduction of the aforementioned ‘woke’ narrative on the historical lens. Here is where the concern for the spread of ‘wokeism’ comes in – many predict that apparent oversensitivity to social injustice blinds the younger generation to other viewpoints.This, if true, would lead to a loss of perspectives and debate—only one particular narrative or set of views would be deemed decent or appropriate.The idea of decency in historical education is something of a novelty and must be appreciated and maintained; if it evolves into the primary focus of history lessons, the subject will be irreparably damaged.

43