Introduction
On a fall morning in 1917, small groups of nondescript men entered government buildings throughout a thriving city. After two days, and without bloodshed, this group had taken control of the largest country in the world. The men were the Bolsheviks; their leader was Vladimir Lenin; and their new form of government was Communism. In less than 72 hours, the course of Russian and world history radically changed.
Critique
I love studying historical events like the Russian revolution. Learning about these history gives me insights into why the world exists the way it does. It has always surprised me when others feel the exact opposite way about the topic. I had a friend once describe studying history as being like sitting in a rocking chair. It gives you something to do but you never get you anywhere. The people who dislike history all have similar critiques:
- We had to go through the meaningless exercise of memorizing names and dates.
- If we actually learned from history, we would not repeat the mistakes our ancestors made
- History is full of different perspectives; and we can’t know which side is accurate.
These complaints have validity, but they are misplaced. The critique should be directed not at the study of history itself but how it is taught.
Theoretically, the way to study history is to treat it like a timeline measured in years, and marked by events. We move along the timeline, stopping at the events we perceive as most important. Approaching the study of history in this way pushes teachers and students to focus on events that conform to the timeline structure. More often than not, the events we study are the ones that have clear progression, like elections, wars, or disasters. These events have a beginning, a clear sequence and a conclusion. Moving away from this formulaic view of history can help us to reduce the emphasis on names and dates. Students shouldn’t need to focus on these facts unless they relate to a deeper historical context
My experience learning about the Russian Revolution is a prime example of an event that was treated in the context of a timeline.. When I studied history in school, most of the conversation about the Revolution concerned its impact on the world during WWII and beyond. Studying the revolution solely from the view of other larger events robs students of a rich discussion about the ideology of Communism.
Communism vs. democracy was the debate that defined the 20th century. The conflict between these two ideologies wasn’t about government, but rather how citizens were choosing to structure their society. History repeats itself only because we spend too much time talking about events instead of how our predecessors come to their ideological conclusions.
Up until the 1400’s, ideologies and historical lessons were passed down generation to generation through word of mouth. The best format to verbalize history was through stories. Stories can be entertaining but are not optimal for assessing history.. They are written by the victors who are incentivized to leave out key details and dissenting viewpoints.
For example, after the Bolsheviks took control of the Russian government, many battles were fought within the country. Their main opponent was the White Army, which was a Russian group attempting to defend capitalism. In most history lessons, the White army and their ideological beliefs are referenced in a sentence-- if at all. After the communists had won, the White army was only referenced as the losers in the great Russian struggle. Adjusting our focus away from a battle's outcome and instead actively seeking out the beliefs of all sides helps to gain that missing perspective.
What you do about it
History class needs a makeover. The study of great events should be approached less through the lens of when and what took place and more from the perspective of the people involved. Major events like the Russian Revolution whose impact on society might not be understood for decades, provide an opportunity to explore topics like inequality and why an ideology like communism appealed to certain Russian’s at that time. Studying people and ideologies gives names and dates more meaning, exposes students to multiple perspectives, and if done correctly, helps the next generation understand what came before them.
Conclusion
History is a challenging topic to teach, but we know what doesn’t work. Focusing on names and dates, ignoring the human experience, and avoiding the study of all sides does not serve us well. One way we can fix these problems is by focusing on the people and ideologies. Doing this helps the students of today understand how that past has shaped the world we live in. History isn’t a neatly organized timeline-- it's a messy knot of human ideals. To enrich the way history is understood, we need to study the people and ideologies, rather than simply the flashy events.