Who Own's History - Research Paper Example

Who Owns History? People conduct their activities in the society without considering that whatever a person does in the society would be used in the coming days as history. Humanity relies in history to make policies and strategies that affect life today. Reference to history is part of humanity. It is quite hard for the society to move without visiting the history of yester years in developing policies today. Historians define history as events or scenes that occurred in the past. Past is not distinct, thereby leading to the question who determines history. The question may look cheap but quite nagging. Politicians make their references from historic events. They take there time to study historic events which had greater influence to human life, develop the event to suite their current conditions and unroll it to the society. This reason has led many people argue that history would reoccur in ones lifetime. Largely, the statement makes great sense in human life. The society owes a lot to history because the governance of the day depends on the governance of the previous day. Many people have taken their time to study what took place before their existence because the life of a man is history. Some documentation about history argues that a man would be ignorant if he does not take his time to explore what happened before he was born. The progress that the society boost of could only be realized when history is tabled. For instance, how would a person know his great grand father who died before he was born if history does not exist? Some people fear to study history arguing that historic events are past, yet they fail to recognize that history has influenced their lives today. This paper seeks to answer the question who determines which history is anointed as the true history. The quest for who determines which history is anointed as the true history leads to explorations of events that took place in the past. Eric Foner took his time as an historian to evaluate and determine who own history. He came out with his argument, which indicated that each individual in the society has a role in creating history. Studying history provides an opportunity for owning history. The study of the past helps in shaping the future by dictating the actions of today. The validity of this statement lies on the role that the government plays in the society. The government has its powers upon the people, yet it cannot exist without the people. Mr. Foner’s book who own history explores the nature of life in American history, South Africa and Soviet Union. His book provides an insight why there is no socialism in America. He goes a head to point out the importance of history in the community and the world. In the beginning of his book, Foner describes his early life in communist family. He started seeing the social and political gap that existed in America, though people claim that America is a land of liberty. The communist fight against racism influenced his life. Foner’s family had portrayed concern to the blacks whom the American white neglected or viewed as second-class citizens. Foner learnt that a person’s commitment in pursuing social justice would infuse the person’s view into history. Many articles and books that people read provide some element of truth to Foner’s view. Rising in the societal rank would expose a person to be remembered in history. Foner took this opportunity as an insight into studying history and changing the society. He took the road to academic success a means that would bring him to the limelight of history. Foner provides the history of America in his book by pointing out the social issues in the American society. He paints America as a nation that has condoned racialism under the guise of the western styles (Foner 157). His history is against the American, capitalists and democratic zeitgeist. The book portrays Foner as a left thinker. The book points the rise of Ronald Reagan and failure of the government to sustain the economy. He points the failures of socialism, communism and liberalism in creating an environment that would sustain the economic wellbeing of the nation. Largely, the book contains history of how the American have succeeded and failed in one area or the other. Foner is against the idea of letting the government run the economy. The failure of communism in Cambodia and Vietnam, The crisis brought by the invasion of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and the introduction of Marxism in Nicaragua are some of the historical events that have puzzled the society. Many people have failed to link these ugly events to the common notion against America as the bad boy. Foner argued that the Right took on the counterattack to persuade people that it had conducted itself with an intention of making things better. On the other hand, Christopher Columbus is criticized because of his discovery and use of the atomic bomb against the Japanese in World War II. In the book who own history, Foner does not like the omission made by the Soviet scholars and historians in leaving out the issue of class in the society instead, they point out imperialism. He further argued that the Soviet Scholars do point out a clear distinction between socialist and bourgeois ideologies. He adds that the scholars have replaced the whole history that it was search for human values which Foner seems to reject. It is not fair for scholars and historian to paint a different point in the society in order to change the meaning of an event that the society knows. When such steps are taken, the meaning of history would be lost. The lovers of the America history should be aware that the American history has its credits and crimes. Foner confronts his audience with the unpleasant truths that he has recorded in his book. Lecturing history in the university has provided a chance for him to drum the truth about historical events in the world, which have not been recorded in an appropriate manner by historians. The American freedom in the age of globalization faces the influence of the economic constraints, libertarians and armed militiamen. The freedom that the American people should enjoy face threats which globalization has contributed. Foner argues that there is need for one to take a keen note on the action of the militiamen and the economist who influence the freedom that people have in the society. Largely, his argument point out how history would change. The action of the militiamen would influence the history of America. It will be noted that at some point in America history such and such event took place under the reign of so and so. Foner asks his colleagues to extend their work by incorporating the events that occur in the society due to the fight towards the liberation of the third world. Wealth put people in different social classes. Inequality in the society is a recipe of wealth distribution. Many people who have inadequate wealth would lead a life according to their standard. The society would give a name to these people based on their ability to conduct their affairs in the society. History would take its course based on the presentation that the scholars provide to a particular event. It is worth mentioning that Foner view America as an enemy of history. One would wish to know more about the statement since it sparks different reaction. Foner discredits Ken Burns for his argument that the civil war that took place in America was a class between the white people. Changing the meaning of an event that takes place in the society would alter the historic events. Foner is of the opinion that the truth about some events that occur in the society must be told plainly, as they occur since this would provide an opportunity to the society in pointing out the crimes and achievement of humanity. In conclusion, Foner’s book who owns history does not seem to answer the question, but provide several essays that point on historic events that have taken place in America and other parts of the world. Foner argues that some historic events would lose their meaning if another version substitutes the original version. In that regard, he pointed out the Soviet scholars omitted key issues about socialist ideologies. Everyone as a part to play in owning history since history would be recorded based on events that occur in the society. Work cited Foner, Eric. Who Owns History?: Rethinking the Past in a Changing World. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2003. 10-30, 150-200. Print. Read More