History Matters

False narratives undermining the historic truth that the USA and Australia are fundamentally decent and tolerant nations must be challenged, argues the IPA Foundations of Western Civilisation Program Director Bella d’Abrera.

In The Idea of History, the great English philosopher and historian R.G. Collingwood (1889-1943) wrote that “history is for human self-knowledge. The only clue to what man can do is what man has done. The value of history, then, is that it teaches us what man has done and thus what man is.” On that basis alone, it is unlikely Collingwood would recognise what is being taught as history in Australian schools and universities, and he would certainly agree it is of little value.

Across the nation, children are subjected to a postmodernist version of history which does its best to show that, historically, Western Civilisation has been structurally, institutionally, morally, and epistemically violent in its entirety. One of the fundamental problems with postmodernism is positing that nothing can actually be learnt from studying the past, that historians should give up their claim to any special authority in the matter, and instead should approach the field as a means of critical self-reflection. In other words, postmodernism rejects the notion that the past must be understood ‘historically’. Any critique of this approach, however, goes down very badly indeed with many in the academic community.

This was demonstrated two years ago when, after noting a massive decline in the number of undergraduates studying history, Professor James H. Sweet, then president of the American Historical Association, dared to suggest in the AHA’s journal that perhaps some of the onus lay on the historians themselves. In his 2022 article Is History History? Identity Politics and Teleologies of the Present, Sweet suggested, ever so gently, that perhaps historians might like to refocus their attentions on the past and move away from Critical Race and Radical Gender theory. He wrote:

If we don’t read the past through the prism of contemporary social justice issues – race, gender, sexuality, nationalism, capitalism – are we doing history that matters?

This new history often ignores the values and mores of people in their own times, as well as change over time, neutralising the expertise that separates historians from those in other disciplines.

In echoes of the accusations of white supremacy levelled at the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation when it attempted to introduce a Bachelor of Western Civilisation at the University of Sydney, Sweet was condemned as a racist by fellow historians. Many not only contend there is only one acceptable world view but that they are doing history that matters, which is history with a political purpose.

Historians impose their prejudices.

Harnessing history to politics is, of course, not without precedent. In the 19th century, liberal politician Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800–1859), possessed an unshakable belief in the idea of human progress. Macaulay created a national story in which superstition and autocracy was overcome by the ‘Glorious Revolution’ in 1688, after which Britain adopted a balanced constitution and a culture of freedom of belief and expression. Macaulay’s Whig history was a powerful tool for the emerging Liberal Party and Whiggish history became the national story.

In his 1931 ‘Whig Interpretation of History’, Herbert Butterfield sought to show how history is distorted when historians impose their prejudices on the study of the past and that they should endeavour to “evoke a certain sensibility towards the past, the sensibility which studies the past for the sake of the past”. Gibbon and Macaulay had political projects, reflected the prejudices of their ages, and presumed a certain moral superiority over previous generations. The same could be said for historians in academia now, many of whom certainly reflect the prejudices of our age and display an unshakeable belief in their own moral certitude. They have reinvented themselves as social justice warriors with a clearly defined political program of decolonisation. This particular program is a practical application of post-colonial theory, which looks to deconstruct the West by systematically undoing colonialism and all its manifestations and impacts.

Decolonisation maintains the West has constructed the idea that rationality and science are good in order to perpetuate its own power and marginalise non-rational, non-scientific forms of knowledge production elsewhere. Therefore, it looks to devalue white Western ways of knowing simply because it belongs to white Westerners, and seeks instead to promote other forms of knowledge.

Universities are now equipping students with the tools to decolonise every cultural institution in this country. For example, the Australian National University currently offers ‘Decolonising Methodologies and other Indigenous Perspectives on Research’, which teaches students to “critically challenge problematic ‘truths’ and other powerful ideas that have contributed to the dispossession and marginalisation of First Nations People”. In Victoria, La Trobe University offers ‘Colonising Australia’s First Peoples’ which encourages students to “examine the relationship between the discipline of history and colonialism, including the problems created when knowledge is constructed using the colonial archive”.

Decolonisation makes the claim that rule of law, freedom of speech and conscience, representative democracy, so-called ‘heteronormativity’, the traditional notion of the family, education, museums, and libraries are toxic institutions specifically designed to oppress minorities and disproportionately benefit white people. Because the modern state of Australia is founded on the values and institutions of Western Civilisation, it too can only be defined by oppression and racism and must be decolonised. The idea an entire nation can be irredeemably tainted by racism is embodied in ‘The 1619 Project’, an ‘initiative’ launched in 2019 by The New York Times Magazine. This dangerous piece of long-form journalism promoted a false narrative which says the United States’ founding was wholly about slavery and perpetuating racial inequality.

Decolonisation has a profound impact.

Just as the US must atone for its original sin of slavery, so too does Australia have to atone for the sin of colonisation. This idea is propagated and taught to Australians through an education system designed to produce exactly the type of individual who will hire an angle grinder, don a balaclava, and venture out under the cover of darkness to saw through the ankles of Captain Cook’s bronze likeness in order to punish him for being a ‘racist coloniser’.

From kindergarten onwards, Australian children are being funnelled through a depressing pipeline of propaganda which depicts this country as racist. Recent IPA research has revealed we now have a government-mandated Early Years Framework which introduces toddlers to the concept this nation is so fractured that their role in life is to mend it by being active citizens in the journey of reconciliation.

In the framework titled ‘Belonging, Being & Becoming’ we learn that “early childhood education has a critical role to play in delivering this outcome and advancing Reconciliation in Australia”. Educators recognise “diversity contributes to the richness of our society and provides a valid evidence base about ways of knowing” and “for Australian children it also includes promoting greater understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing and being and actively working towards Reconciliation”.

Educators are also encouraged to decolonise early childhood education. A book recommended in the framework says they are to reconsider “education spaces, which focuses on acknowledging colonisation and its continued impacts, while seeking to disrupt and reconceptualise colonial understandings”. Decolonisation might involve “critically reflecting on existing curriculum, resources, and practices, and considering whether they serve to sustain or privilege colonial narratives and how they can be reconsidered to make visible Indigenous and First Nations perspectives”. Toddlers are able to spot the Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander flags at a hundred paces, but have no idea what the Union Jack and Southern Cross constellation are. They know how to recite the Welcome to Country in Aboriginal languages but they are unable to read or write.

Thanks to the addition of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories Cross Curriculum Priority in our National Curriculum, the single narrative currently taught to primary and secondary school students is that Australia was founded on racism, and that the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788 resulted in dispossession and genocide. It is no coincidence that the Acknowledgement of Country ceremonies in kindergartens and schools are becoming more elaborate and increasingly performative by the day. It recently came to light that students in a Sydney primary school start their day by putting their hands on the ground and repeating “always was, always will be Aboriginal land” before each assembly. In Victoria, the Aboriginal national anthem, which is accompanied by Aboriginal instruments, is played at assemblies in lieu of the official version.

Decolonisation has a profound impact on society. By their very nature, historical narratives are highly potent in shaping national self-understanding, and self-worth. The implications of the decolonisation movement, which is based on a false history, are bound up with the future of our country itself, because our domestic and foreign policy draws from a cultural story linked to national identity. They describe our place in the world, help define social relationships between citizens and the State, and give purpose and meaning to action.

Every time we are forced to sit through Qantas’ sermonising about whose lands we are landing on, and acknowledging past and present elders, or we are lectured to on the Skybus about how “sovereignty was never ceded”, we are being told we are strangers in our own country. This alienation benefits no one but is simply a slow and painful process of decolonisation by demoralisation.

Historical narratives have profound political significance. Last year Penny Wong, our foreign minister, who would not be foreign minister had it not been for the values and the institutions of Western Civilisation, even flew to London to lecture the British about how bad the Empire was, and the horrors of colonialism. The doomed Voice to Parliament campaign undermined our nation and was led by a government committed to dividing Australians by race, by way of creating a parallel system of representative government comprised of Aboriginal Australians to the exclusion of all other Australians. Meanwhile, the Victorian Government’s Orwellian sounding ‘Truth and Justice’ Commission is based on the demonstrable falsehood that Australia is racist to its core.

The commission’s architects claim the inquiry will reveal how colonisation resulted in racial inequality suffered by Indigenous people in Victoria. This is the equivalent of telling all non-Indigenous Australians—whether they arrived 100, 50, or five years ago—that they should feel guilty about the actions of people from whom they are not descended, for events which took place over two centuries ago. This inquiry has nothing to do with ‘Truth’ or ‘Justice’, but everything to do with perpetuating grievance and dividing Australians.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the left-wing political parties continue to promote fake history by way of kindergartens, schools, and universities which continue to inflict guilt and shame upon the nation until such a time as their ideas are accepted as a fait accompli. Last year, the PM said he wanted ‘fair dinkum’ history to be taught in Australian schools. By ‘fair dinkum’ he meant children need to be taught about the atrocities committed by people of British descent upon Aboriginal Australians.

The majority of Australians are proud to be Australian.

This narrative, this distortion of history, is creating a national crisis. It is undermining Australia’s self-confidence, dividing communities, deepening resentments, and—in some cases—casting doubt over whether it should even exist at all. Every year, voices calling for Australia Day to be cancelled and replaced with ‘Invasion Day’ grow louder and more insistent. The majority of Australians are becoming more reluctant to celebrate the day, fly an Australian flag, or express any pride in their country. There is no doubt that Australian society is less confident and more fractured than it was 20 or even 10 years ago.

The pendulum has now swung too far. This is a fundamentally decent and tolerant country, and the narrative of constant racial strife is starting to be rejected by mainstream Australians who believe there is more that unites us than divides us. As a society, we need to confront past injustices, and not dismiss them. Focusing solely on the dark pages does not benefit society in the long run. We need to talk about how Australia is a direct beneficiary of the fruits of Western Civilisation, which include the foundations of our political system, our governmental and administrative offices, freedoms, democratic institutions, and our cultural heritage.

Manning Clark wrote that:

History, to be great as History, must have a point of view on the direction of society. It must also have something to say, some great theme to lighten our darkness.

Imagine how different the national conversation would be if the activists in the media, in public spaces, in museums, universities, schools, civil services, local government, and business corporations stopped pushing this single narrative critique of Australian society and decided to change the narrative. Imagine if the authors of the National Curriculum followed Singapore’s example and incorporated ‘national pride’ as a core competency, as well as an Australian equivalent to ‘Know and love Singapore’, and ‘Be proud to be Singaporean and understand Singapore in relation to the world’ as core competencies.

The outcome of the Voice referendum—as well as the backlash against Woolworths’ decision not to stock Australia Day paraphernalia this year—confirms which side of this cultural conflict the majority of Australians are on. They are proud of this country’s history and proud to be Australian.

It is time to start pushing back against the malign forces which are attempting to demoralise, undermine, and dismantle this nation from within, one statue at a time.

This article from the Spring 2024 edition of the IPA Review is written by the IPA Foundations of Western Civilisation Program Director Bella d’Abrera.