About a year ago I was telling a friend about George Clark, Moses Hazen, & John Sullivan. Like most of us (myself included until about 2 years ago), he hadn't suspected how bloody the Revolution was, nor how awesome most of the Patriots were.
We grew up taught an intensely sanitized history, which for both of us mostly emphasized obscure black figures like Attucks, Wheatley, Tubman, and Carver.
Huge figures like Jackson, Wilson, & Penn were completely ignored. Even figures like Washington & Jefferson that were discussed received a critical view that others like King did not.
Our historical educations were mainly devoted to instilling a false sense of the centrality of the black experience in American history.
Other aspects of US historical education were meant to alienate us from our heritage. To be an American was to be an immigrant, while Americans were considered un-American.
This is the history that most Americans under the age of 40 understand. It promotes a sense of America as an idea, a sense that leads to those who disagree with the @nytimes to be considered foreigners within a decade.
@nytimes It's interesting to talk to older people about their views on America. The American experience for them was settlers, pioneers, and inventors - not blacks and immigrants.
@nytimes Nonetheless, the old pioneer history was superseded by the black-immigrant history. And in turn, the black-immigrant history is being superseded by a new history.
@nytimes The history that we grew up with still emphasized racial equality. Americans, blacks, and foreigners were to reconcile our differences and move forward to a glorious mongrel future. (naturally prior experiments like Paraguay & Brazil were ignored)
@nytimes The 1619 Project, California's recent education reforms, and other similar programs do not teach a future for Americans. In this history, we are an irredeemable evil, the source of most wickedness. Our heritage (both biological & cultural) is viewed pathologically.
@nytimes The most powerful media organization in the country published the following essays. This is how American history will be remembered by the next generation. 
@nytimes As tempting as it is to despair, this is also an opportunity. Shifts in worldview are always controversial, and will bring attention to their detractors.
@nytimes There is no reason at all we can't tell the true story of our country. There is no reason more should know of Tubman than Sullivan, or of King than MacArthur.
@nytimes The rebirth of Russia & Ukraine began in the 1980s with cultural revivals, historical reenactors, and memorial societies. National consciousness & historical memory were a prerequisite for successful patriotic societies. America is no different.
@nytimes There aren't many of us, and most focus on the latest drama in the movement or Trump administration. Far more important is developing our identity, culture, and heritage. Writing an American history in particular is important.
@nytimes My friend said it would be worthwhile to write up a short (300-400 page) history to give an average American a good understanding of our country, and who we actually are.
@nytimes If you are interested, please shoot me a dm. I have no idea how to write a book.
@nytimes American history is 410 years, so at 410 pages we'd get 1 page per year, or 17 chapters at 25 pages/chapter. Figure it will be better to give all years equal space, rather that the usual myopic focus on recent events.
