I don’t know why every country always seems to want to bury the skeletons of its past. I assume it’s because it’s embarrassIng to have to admit to your nation’s citizens just how irresponsibly the folks with statues may have acted or how reprehensible your nation’s policies may have been, and that knowing about these things could potentially cause those citizens to think less of their nation as a result, or feel like they have to make excuses to other nations to save face.
BUT on the other hand just think how an adult citizen‘s faith/trust in their government might be shaken/shattered if they were to suddenly discover that their government has been LYING to them their whole life about something so important. Why, some of ‘em might be outraged at the discovery, and then have a hard time believing anything their government tells them from that point forward. And others might even develop an unhealthy coping mechanism where they selectively “choose not to believe” the truths they find inconvenient, even when those truths (and sufficient facts to back them up) are thrust into their faces. Adopting an oblivious attitude/habit like that could lead to all sorts of other problems as time goes by.
to:dr; Honesty is the best domestic policy.
—Patrick
I agree with you. But I also know for a fact that a vocal portion of this country (mostly conservatives) believe that history teachers are there to create proud, patriotic Americans. They prioritize this over actually
educating Americans. In their mind every high school grad should think that the country is a paragon of virtue, regardless of the facts.
I have had also numerous negative interactions with parents upset that I focus on negative parts of the past, or too much on one group over another. People have an agenda for education in history, and for some the truth doesn't fit into that agenda.
By the way, there are two states that basically control what history textbooks say. Texas and California are the biggest buyers of textbooks, so most publishers write their textbooks to please one or the other. They can't handle the cost of tailoring textbooks for each state (beyond the required state history sections). So around 80-90% of textbooks reflect the ideological views of politicians in either California or Texas. Generally speaking you get two very different flavors of history with this system, and students don't know that the other exists.
Texas "style" books talk incessantly about the glories of the US and typically downplay anything negative; California does a much better job balancing the narrative with positive and negative, but sometimes goes a bit wonky with other things by listening to fringe groups with an agenda (for example, a group of Indian-American parents almost successfully got any mention of the caste system removed from textbooks because it made India look bad).
I don't know what to tell you. Anecdotally I can tell you that I, and my colleagues at my school, try to talk about bad things like the genocide against Native Americans, the Tuskegee Experiments, Japanese Internment, and so on. The Holocaust is covered in detail numerous years, in multiple subjects. We talk about the good things too; we're just trying to teach about all of the past and what it means for the present. We don't cherry pick.
I'd also like to point out that sometimes schools teach this information, and teenagers promptly forget it. The survey doesn't necessarily represent what schools
teach so much as it represents what young people
remember from their classes.