Nick: In recent years there has
been a steady increase of
misinformation.
Two historians have assembled a
team to push back myths on some
of the country's most pressing
issues.
They spoke to geoff Bennett
about their collection, taking
on the biggest legends and lies
about our past.
Reporter: Kevin Kruse and
Julian, welcome to the newshour.
The essays take on everything
from feminism to white backlash
over the removal of confederate
monuments to American
exceptionalism to drums America
first approach.
What was the organizing
principle behind this book of
essays ?
>> Our main purpose was to push
back against some of the lies
out there in the public
discourse today.
Certain topics presented
themselves as obvious ones at
the more we got into it we
wanted to give a full picture of
the range of American history.
Reporter: Why publish a book
like this now ?
>> Part of it was us listening
and hearing and reading ideas
about American history that were
really does connect did from
what academic historians have
been writing about and finding
in the archives.
We wanted to try to share with
the public but we know that is
so different than what you hear.
Part of it is also how public --
how politicized history has
become in the classrooms and we
wanted to bring some of the best
and brightest scholars that
write well to tackle big
questions I'd Americans have
been wrestling with not just
over the last few years but over
the last few decades.
Reporter: Let's talk about some
of the essays starting with
Sarah's essay entitled "America
first."
It has gently never worked as a
unifying national motto.
On the contrary it has
consistently served as a
divisive code camouflaged by its
ostensible harmlessness,
frequently conspiratorial cover
story.
Tell me more about the origins
of this myth of America first
and how it has evolved.
>> America first became part of
the national lexicon in the last
few years when the former
president used it as one of his
mottos but it is a term that has
been around for a long time.
Certainly in the World War II
period and in the period leading
up to that.
It was a term embraced and not
just those that supported
isolationism that many connected
to the right.
Sara in her essay shows a long
history of how the term, it is
not just a patriotic motto, it
is a concept, a phrase that has
been connected to many elements
of reactionary politics from
World War II period right
through to today.
Reporter: Gilmore writes about
the so-called good protests
which she posits is based on
nonviolent resistance of the
civil rights movement and she
says the narratives rest on four
misconceptions.
The demonstrations were the
first of their kind.
That most Americans gave their
support to the protests.
They quickly exposed and
vanquished hatred.
And they ended happily by
bringing racial equality to
America.
Why is that the myth of the good
protest so dangerous ?
>> It is dangerous because it
presents a false split between
the past and the present.
There are those that held up
this false idea of the civil
rights movement as one that was
not controversial.
At it could settle things easily
and martin Luther king was
universally adored which was
false at the time.
But if you have a view of the
civil rights movement in the
1960's as being without any
stakes to it, without any
opponents to it, it makes other
protests pale in comparison.
The black lives matter protests
were constantly contrasted
against this false image of the
civil rights protests.
Reporter: David bell writes
about the perceived myth of
American exceptionalism.
He is dismissive of the term and
his rationale seems to be that
most nations could be considered
exceptional in one sense or
another.
I think people might read that
and take issue with that.
How do you defend the position
he takes ?
>> The idea of American
exceptionalism has been around
for a long time and embraced by
the left and the right.
It is a real bipartisan
argument.
The idea that America is not
simply better than other nations
but fundamentally different.
We have avoided the problems
that faced comparable countries.
What he is trying to argue is
that really skews our
understanding of how united
States evolved.
It is better to have a realistic
understanding and no some of the
similarities between our country
and comparable nations in
western Europe for example
because then we get a deeper
knowledge about how we as a
country have wrestled with those
problems.
Sometimes differently than
others and sometimes the same.
I think what David argues is
very important and he shows
there is a history to the
concept that has been deployed
politically and it takes our eye
away from issues that we need to
address as a nation.
Reporter: The essays isolate
members of the conservative
movement as the main culprits of
mythmaking.
There are people that will read
the book or watch this interview
and wonder what exists of the
lies and legends, to use the
phrase I read in the book,
promulgated by the political
left ?
>> A fair question but the
reason there is so much emphasis
on this representations of
history coming from the right is
they have been actively engaged
with history in the last few
years.
President trump led the way and
not just in terms of his claims
to have been the best or biggest
or first to have done such and
such but even in the last days
of his presidency putting
forward this commission report
which tried to implicate a
patriotic education.
The right has been very engaged
in the project and that is why
you see historians pushing back
more against lies from the
right.
I think if Biden tries to push a
patriotic education we will see
historians try to push back
against that as well.
>> And I would add that we frame
the book around the moment we
are living in and a lot of this
is most pronounced.
Reporter: You are both
historians with significant
public profiles.
Do you feel the moment we are
living in requires historians to
venture outside academic into
the mainstream to combat some of
the stuff head-on ?
>> Absolutely pure historians
have a special set of expertise
and there is a hunger in the
public to understand this
nations history and historians
have an ability to fill the gap.
Luckily we live in an era of
social media which has helped a
lot of these myths and lies
spread but it has also given
every scholar out there and
ability or a platform to push
back against them.
Reporter: Julian and Kevin,
thank you for your time.
>> Thanks for having us.