Why Are Historians Important In History

This paper deals with ways history can be interpreted and influences different interpretations have on society and individuals. This is explored through

The study of history and the teaching of history has come under intense public debate in the United States in the last few decades. The “culture-wars” began with the call to add more works by non-Caucasians and women and has bled into the study of history. Not only in the study of history or literature, this debate has spread into American culture like wildfire.

The foreign policy of the United States has changed drastically between eras. During the Gilded Age, America experienced isolationism. The US focused on expanding their borders locally and seizing control of Central America. With the first rise of global and total war, America transitioned to being somewhat interested in foreign affairs while still staying neutral to its own cause. However, that did not last long with America's hand forced and entered World War I as an associate to the Allied Powers. Twenty years after World War I, another World War started after Germany wanted revenge for their “unfair” treatment. America was once again forced into the war after Japan, Germanys ally, surprise attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. After the end of World War II, American isolationism completely ended and the US found itself as a global superpower. With the end of the world wars came a Cold War solely focused between the US and the Soviet Union. The US got itself into unwinnable wars, attempts to overthrow communist regimes, a weapons race, and a technology race. Foreign policy shifts between Détente and escalation. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War came to an end and America focused on allies and trade. The long peace ended with the September 11 attacks. These attacks launched America into a War on Terrorism, and they adopted the Bush Doctrine. Over the course of American history, foreign policy transitioned from isolationism into the “Empire of Liberty,”

The American foreign policy changed over time has reflected in its national interest. Foreign policy is a major issue for the people today is because after the terrorists attacked in Paris, they killed over a hundred people. Therefore, the United States wants to go start a war with terrorists in Isis. But Congress prevents the United States from going in war with Isis.They claim if they were start a war with Isis, it will promotes more terrorists in the country. Also, they said it would be better if the United States were to stay neutral and stay away from foreign affairs. Although, the country wasn’t entirely sure if it’s the right thing to ignore other countries’ problems while they are dealing with terrorists. It is the United States’ job and responsibility to intervene in countries and give them support against terrorists. There are times when the United States are stay in insolation, at first, but eventually they start invade in other countries. They only invade in other countries while they might threaten their economic resources, industrial trade or businesses and the people. For an example, in World War I, when the British was fighting against the Axis Powers in Europe, they asked the United States to come join them, but they denied their request multiple times. The United States doesn’t want to be in the conflict or involved with war problems Thus, they ignored them most during World War I. But, in regards to the Germans had attacked the Lusitania ship

A major case of this trend is the views of Crazy Horse the Man of the Oglala Sioux and George Armstrong Custer. The perspective of Custer and Crazy Horse is being viewed from different angles. Is Crazy Horse validated for killing soldiers, or was Custer doing what was best for The United States. Many controversies are raised from the two arguing opinions, and Historians argue over both. What do historians feel now as opposed to the 19th Century view of historians and the public? The bias from the time of the attacks to the bias that we face today can be said to have changed, and how have historians documented this, and prepared to defend the ideas they raise?

Historians analyze facts and sources to discover and understand the mysteries of the past. Based on the sources, a historian’s perspective is influenced a great deal. They also include their own points of view from their own research, influencing their thinking. With different sources and different perspectives, disagreement is bound to rise. Variation in history results in multiple ideological frameworks. Howard Zinn was a historian, author, and social activist who grew up in a poor Russian family in Jewish Brooklyn. He was an industrial worker and labor activist who was incredibly politically involved resulting in trouble with the law. Zinn’s experiences have influenced his views in history as shown in one of his famous works, A People’s

With our history, perspective is key. When reading about a certain speech or event it is important to make sure you have a reliable source. Sometimes primary sources are scarce, so secondary sources will be needed. Sometimes the sources can clash with each other, making it hard to tell what is true and not. Different perspectives of historic events can dampen understanding of the true message given when personal bias and dim perspectives are applied. Our history is being influenced by secondary sources rather than the real message of the primary source.

Some would say society around the world as a whole has evolved into a self-serving society. Through teaching the historical events of the ancestors this may help curtail the negative attitude that is running rampant today. It is vitality important that we have scholars who will continue researching and documenting history.

America may be a relatively young nation, turning 240 years old this year, but in its short existence, it has had a powerful influence over world affairs, for better or worse. George Washington once said, “It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” However, since his presidency, the United States’ position in the world has steered from a steely isolationist stance to one open and hungry for involvement in the matters of other countries. America craved land and power to bolster itself and utilized foreign policy to do so, shifting towards an imperialist position. However, this change in foreign policy resulted

Everything I said is an interpretation of history; no one can escape it. Nevertheless, the manner by which scholars interpret history can be managed. Just because history is filled with interpretations, it doesn’t subtract content to learn from and improve the moral future of civilization. My interest in ancestry is to assess where I come from, what I can learn, and where I am going. Gaillet says progressives who typically discern history from modern standards refuse to approach the past to learn form it. As Gaillet stresses, it’s important for scholars to question the motives of their research: are they selective of facts that fits their worldview

The issues that people had with old historiographies were that they weren’t complex enough and lacked comprehension of cultural aspects. They rarely strayed from the political or economic topics and never discussed important cultural avenues. Levine talks of synthesis in historical writing but deems this as a way to dismiss the introduction of new subject matter into history. He, on the contrary, wishes for the expansion of subjects in history and feels there has been too much neglect on cultural aspects and the importance that it offers to understanding the past as it really was. Levine believes historians need to increase their tolerance and acceptance of the complexities of the past as well as the historian profession in order to effectively and accurately write about the

American foreign policy has gone through many changes during our 200 years as an independent nation; our position as a global power has obligated us to participate in world affairs, even when public opinion has been unsupportive. After World War 2 we were only rivaled by the Soviet Union as a superpower; our policy at the time was to establish a righteous world order while simultaneously protecting that order against threats that could tear it down (i.e.: communism). After the end of the cold war the U.S was indecisive on what type of foreign policy to establish for itself, since American diplomacy before the end of the Cold War was centered on fighting the spread of communism. The answer to this question came within the academic article I

In their book American Foreign Policy since World War 2, Steven W. Hook, and John Spanier take a historical look at American foreign policy. Since its independence, all through to the start of the 20th century, the United States had a policy of detachment. This was rooted in the believe that Europe, the only other meaningful powerful in the world in the 18th and 19th century, had intrinsic issues related to feudism that kept the continent in a constant state of war (Hook & Spanier, 2015). The U.S on its part was far away from Europe and had a unique chance to chart a different course, one free from the troubles of Europe. As a democracy free from the class systems of Europe and hence maintain peace and stability (Hook & Spanier, 2015). To maintain this peace and stability, it was in the United States interests to maintain detachment from Europe. In fact, Monroe wrote that Europe and its flawed system was evil and America should strive as much as possible to stay away from it (Hook & Spanier, 2015). However, in the 20th century, this policy of detachment was put to the test when the United States was drawn into the first and second world wars by external factors. This led the United States to get more engaged in global affairs. The idea behind engagement was to promote the ideals of democracy which, the U.S believed were the pillars of peace, as well as to protect itself from aggressors like Japan in the Second World War. After the

According to Dr. Strain’s presentation, “Doing History in the Digital Age,” Historians are individuals that participate in a variety of research and [many] specialize in one kind. For example, Dr. Strain specializes in twentieth-century U.S. history with emphases in American studies and African-American history. Dr. Strain’s research interests include civil rights and hate crime. archival research plays a tremendous role in an Historian’s life. As a Historian, it’s one’s duty to go around and tell people about their lives, and to conduct research based on their topic of interest. Methods of research include archival research, books, newspapers, the internet, and a critical perspective view. By using a combination of both primary and secondary

Today some Americans consider that Washington's words are still wise ones, and that the USA should take away from world affairs whenever possible. In fact, , the US has been involved in world politics throughout the 20th century, and as