How Do You Say Colonialism in . . . ?
Bringing colonial history into the language classroom engages students in both history and language.
“World languages are sometimes just a footnote in the teaching of history. When I started teaching French, I thought the same about history. I occasionally peppered my lessons with the historical ties between France and the Francophone world. Most textbooks identify these different regions but gloss over the main reason why French is spoken there: colonialism. I spent some time trying to figure out how to engage students with this historical aspect of language learning. I found it best to bring colonial history directly into the classroom.”
Book Review
One might mistake Madeleine Albright’s new book as just one of many clichéd warnings about fascism. But the current political situation in the United States isn’t quite a case of never-cry-wolf.
Fascism: A Warning
By Madeleine Albright
New York: HarperCollins, 2018
The term ‘fascism’ gets bandied around easily these days. The 1935 political satire, It Can’t Happen Here, in which Sinclair Lewis warned about the prospect of fascism in the United States, is enjoying a revival now. Borrowing Lewis’ title directly in Can It Happen Here?, Cass Sunstein compiled recent essays on fascism by various scholars. Many other similar works on fascism currently make the Amazon best sellers list. So, one might mistake Madeleine Albright’s new book as just one of many clichéd warnings about fascism. But the current political situation in the United States isn’t quite a case of never-cry-wolf. The wolf is really there, and the cry has only been a collective whimper, at least for now.
This fresh warning comes from Albright’s own experience fleeing fascism. She spent part of her childhood exiled in London during the Nazi occupation of her native Czechoslovakia, returning only for a few years until the Communists took over, prompting her family to emigrate to the United States. Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Joseph Stalin read like characters in her own biography. These early fascists, along with Francisco Franco, may have differed in style, but they were all too similar in the ruinous effects they had on their countries and others.
Albright is well poised to comment on fascism as a scholar and diplomat. She was US Ambassador to the United Nations and then Secretary of State—the first woman appointed to that position. While serving President Bill Clinton, she met with Kim Jong-Il and Vladimir Putin. Her interview notes with them will raise hairs. The parallels between these and other recent fascists like Hugo Chávez, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Viktor Orbán grow more evident through the pages. Are they all really fascist by label? Albright doesn’t address this question, which is perhaps merely academic. Much like their forebears, however, these leaders are all undoubtedly nationalistic and authoritarian, if not totalitarian. One worrying lesson is that democracy has hardly been a bulwark against their power.
Albright cautions readers with these historical and contemporary cases of fascism before turning to the United States under the Trump presidency. America’s current flirtation with fascism strikes Albright as particularly alarming, if not paradoxical. The United States is not only turning away from the defense and promotion of democracy abroad just when it seems more necessary than it did thirty years ago. But the United States also appears to be turning away from these values at home. Many Americans, Albright argues, aren’t the champions of democracy they once were: “We have tossed the measuring-sticks we used in the past into the waste bin. Our attention spans are shorter today, our expectations higher, and we are less likely to overlook flaws that have become ever easier to detect.”
Without plumbing the depths of the partisan divide too deeply, Albright appeals to Americans’ core democratic values to reverse this trend. She concludes by offering questions any citizen or political observer should answer to identify lurking fascism. By the time enough Americans indeed spot the wolf, their cry for genuine help might be too late.
Nationalism redux
Nationalism has since been associated with both liberation and oppression. In many parts of the world today, however, nationalism has taken on a markedly populist tone. This Economist article makes for timely reading.
Many history classes will usually cover the topic of nationalism at some point. A byproduct of the Enlightenment, nationalism got a boost from European statesmen Metternich, Talleyrand, and Castlereagh in the wake of the Napoleonic Wars. The relative peace their nations held lasted for about a hundred years until the outbreak of World War I, which was triggered quite literally in part, by a Serbian nationalist. The spread of nations accelerated around the world and Woodrow Wilson’s ideals of national self-determination sought to replace empires and the countries under their dominion. The post-World War II period saw the rise of even more nations, not fewer, along with the creation of the United Nations. In this international system, the West championed democracy, rule of law, and open markets, even when these values were not universally shared. That system seems to be steadily wilting and the United States of late no longer champions such values.
Nationalism has since been associated with both liberation and oppression. In many parts of the world today, however, nationalism has taken on a markedly populist tone. As this gripping Economist article points out, the “new nationalism does not just insist on the differences between countries, it also thrives on the anger within them.” The article aptly quotes the late historian and essayist, Tony Judt: “’We have entered an age of insecurity: economic insecurity, physical insecurity, political insecurity.’ Populist politicians—almost always nationalist—exploit those insecurities. Claiming a special connection to ‘the people,’ they tell and retell their narratives of corrupt elites, crooked immigrants, misleading media and sinister conspiracies. Social media, which amplify outrage, are the ideal vehicle to spread the word.”
These are sobering words for history students, as well as a timely reminder of why we study history. No system has managed to replace nations, be it Marxism of 20th century or the European Union of the 21st. Where human civilization and nations head is yet to be determined. In the meantime, we should heed the lessons learned from the successes and failures of nations while putting its related -ism in context. Nations are one of the most imaginative of human creations the earth has witnessed. We will need our best imaginations yet to protect that earth and its many inhabitants.