Quantcast

“The People Speak”: Matt Damon rewrites American History

peoplespeakHate history class?

If so, then you must have had to put up with one of those pesky history teachers that insisted on footnotes and citations. And your teacher must have forced you to study the humankind-hating words of dead, white males that are responsible for everything bad in this world.

Now there is no more need for any of that. Matt Damon starred in a movie called “Good Will Hunting” in which he yelled “You wanna read a real history book, read Howard Zinn’s ‘People’s History of the United States.’ That book will f**kin’ knock you on your ass.” He got good reviews, so now apparently Matt is on a mission to spread the word.

Historiography has always prided itself for being a study of truth and data. Theory was always more highly regarded by social scientists and other soft academic departments. But history students – your worries of having to do research are over. No need to go through a tedious reading list to find out about history. Nowadays you simply have to wait for a Hollywood celebrity to tell you what to think, whether in a film or on a TV program such as “The People Speak.”

Sunday, Dec. 13, the History Channel will air the Matt Damon and Josh Brolin documentary “The People Speak.” It is based on Marxist academic Howard Zinn’s capitalism-bashing, America-hating history textbook, “A People’s History of the United States.” As we all know, celebrities are experts on pretty much everything, and now we don’t have to wait until the Academy Awards speeches in order to know what to think anymore.

The production uses Hollywood celebrities to deliver a self-loathing view of the United States through selective speeches, letters and diaries. Appearing in the show are the usual Bush-bashers: Marisa Tomei, Kerry Washington, Viggo Mortensen, Matt Damon, Benjamin Bratt, Eddie Vedder, Bruce Springsteen, and Josh Brolin, who co-produced it along with Damon.

Forget fact. It’s all about context instead of text these days. Don’t listen to someone’s educated opinion; think for yourself. Forget researching the totality of an historical event. Nowadays all you need to do to get an ‘A’ is define history through one of the famous “-isms”; racism, sexism, and classism being at the top, of course.

Leftist drek like “The People Speak” focuses on America’s sins and failings, yet it has received the seal of approval from the History Channel. The History Channel, you ask? Surely they know better. Not so. Let’s not forget that the History Channel is owned by NBC.

So now we have untrained historian wannabes Matt Damon and Josh Brolin making history finally accessible to “the people.” One thing I’ve always noticed about the teaching of history “from the bottom up” – it never really gets very far up. It’s pretty much all about the bottom… not exactly where the actors and ideas that made the United States the greatest nation in history can be found. So I guess we’ll just have to settle for the idea that the entire history of the U.S. is one of racism, sexism, and classism. Thanks to the Hollywood experts, we can add absurdism to the list now.

This is just one more event in the constantly declining approach to understanding history in the United States since the New Left invaded academia in the 1960s and 70s. In the course of getting a BA and an MA in History, I noticed that almost every general history course I took was some revisionist version of history.

It was clear that with so much constant revisionism, there was just no room to teach any of the “vision” of American History. Whether it was history being told from the point of view of the oppressed, the “other” (whatever that is), or from some other perceived victim, every course was created to negate the noble idea of objectivity.

Once academia happily accepted that objectivity was impossible, anything else was fair game. Explaining history no longer was about asking who, what, when, where, and why. It was about lining up chosen facts to support a subjective interpretation. Instead of looking at comprehensive primary source material and seeing complicated perspectives, professors have become experts at presenting selective readings that will support a theory, not a rigorous historical inquiry.

If you sat through a United States history course lately, chances are you spent valuable classroom time discussing the required reading of Sojourner Truth’s “Ain’t I A Woman” speech. That’s fine; it’s a powerful piece of literature, and it’s part of history. But the trouble is, you probably didn’t learn a thing about Lincoln’s “Cooper Union” speech during that semester. (The speech that many historians feel got Lincoln elected.)

Too often the footnotes of history (Sojourner Truth) have replaced the headlines of history (Abraham Lincoln) as we reinvent the past in order to make it more “relevant” and “meaningful.” To believe in the principles of a great nation, you have to be taught what those principles are.

How is this method of teaching history doing anyway? Well, our students usually come in last in international testing standards. But why bother with empirical data, right? With the leftists in charge of academia now combining with the mental midgets of the entertainment industry, students will have even less actual knowledge of the United States and more loathing of it.

Hooray for Hollywood.

Greg Victor

Greg Victor (Parcbench Culture Editor) is a big fan of autodidacticism. He has a Masters in History and appreciates how Parcbench allows him to share his passion for all things cultural (especially music, film, theatre and tennis). He has stage managed many theatrical productions on Broadway and on tour, and is currently on an international tour with the Frank Sinatra musical "Come Fly Away." He is a proud member of the Country Music Association (CMA), and loves bringing talented artists to the attention of Parcbench readers.

More Posts

  • Pingback: "The People Speak": Matt Damon rewrites American History | Parcbench | Insurance mesothelioma structured settlement tax attorney student loan consolidation home loans refinancing home equity line of credit

  • Pingback: "The People Speak": Matt Damon rewrites American History | Parcbench · entertainment life

  • Pingback: "The People Speak": Matt Damon rewrites American History | Parcbench American Me

  • parcbench trucknutz

    matt damon is such a freakin idiot. all these holly douches are!

  • kane

    I hope most people are smart enough to realize you can't get real History from the History Channel.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/FirecrotchMcGee Firecrotch McGee

    "BEFORE THERE WAS MICHAEL MOORE"….phenomenal!
    the hair on the back of my ass just saluted the flag.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention "The People Speak": Matt Damon rewrites American History | Parcbench -- Topsy.com

  • American Ivy

    In high school I'd get almost all my wartime history from the history channel. They never managed to cover WWII, the Civil War, or even the Revolutionary War satisfactorily in school. (But I remember spending almost two months on the lead up and after affects of the Vietnam War.) Sad to see how far it's fallen. Military Channel it is.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/StevenRRepub StevenRRepub

    All I needed to know was that Matt Damon, Josh Brolin and Danny Glover (Hugo Chavez's buddy) were involved in this tripe. I hope people pay attention to what is done with this "documentary", because the next thing Damon and Brolin will do is try to get this shown to children in school. Parents need to make sure that their kids aren't exposed to this distorted history lesson. With a president that doesn't think America is exceptional and who himself has no grasp of history, the hollywood "brains" feel unshackled to spread their propaganda unopposed. We must not allow them to teach this to children or even show it without rebuttal.

    • bmxxtreme

      agreed steven! this cannot go to the schools…and we know they will try it! you rock steve, obama does NOT have a historical context or understanding based in reality.

  • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

    You seem to think that people who watch The People Speak will never watch any other history program, or that all history programs on the History channel are like this. It's not happening in a vaccuum, but I guess if you want to make the argument that the History channel and its entire programming schedule is liberal dreck, go for it.

    Personally, I don't see how people learning about footnotes of history or things off the beaten path of well-known landmarks of the past is any real great danger. The world is a complex thing and the past is not confined to the big events: it's also interesting to learn about the little things that happened at the time to paint a more complete picture of what life was really like during those times. It's not as though people can only handle so much historical information before they start overwriting the old stuff. Human beings deserve more credit than you seem willing to give them.

    • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

      Also, you seem to suggest that anyone mentioning, pointing out, or even vaguely suggesting that America has any kind of failing is some sort of great crime. You'll forgive me if I find this smacks a bit too much of the Bush era "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists" line of shallow thinking. America is not perfect. It's not horrible, but it also isn't the greatest country in the history of the world simply because you were born there, I'm sorry.

      Typically, I hear conservatives most strongly railing against the obnoxiousness of "political correctness" and yet you demand that everyone be politically correct about your view of America as being as close to perfection as possible.

      • Timothy Matlack

        I don't believe there is any conservative or libertarian in this country who would claim America to be "perfect" or without it's flaws. Nor would any sane conservative/libertarian suggest we impose an ideologically-informed agenda-driven version of history, such as the tripe Mr. Zinn and his sycophants have done with his book and now this documentary. The issue here, Trace, is that Mr. Zinn and his ilk are wallowing ONLY in the flaws of this country –and then passing it off as the whole story –or the TRUE history of the country.

        I agree with you, this one documentary is not going to turn people into "terrorists," but that isn't the point of this article either.

        Mr. Zinn's intention is to change the way history and political philosophy is taught to American students and, for the most part, he and his fellow travelers have succeeded. They have you believing there is some moral equivalence between you and me and the "terrorists." You characterized those who believe otherwise as "shallow" thinkers. "The People Speak" should be right up your ally.

        • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

          Why do I characterize others as shallow thinkers? The comment below me, where someone says "I'll never watch any of his pinko commies movies!" has two thumbs up. That's why.

          And I never said I believed there is a moral equivalence between us and terrorists. Why would I? They're scum and murderers.

          You have to understand, I haven't yet watched this program, I'm merely addressing what was said in the article and what was implied by it. After I watch it, and if you would like, we can discuss it more closely.

          Since I haven't seen it or read it, I would appreciate it if you could tell me what the outright falsehoods are (this is not an accusation, it's a genuine question).

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lionheart9 Lionheart9

          I don't see this program as changing history or political philosophy. It's simply reciting the words/documents of Americans who exercised their rights of freedom of speech. And because those people spoke out, history was impacted. They were normal people, not diplomats or politicians, financiers or celebrities, just normal Americans.

          I don't see this program being pushed in the classrooms. It's on the History Channel. Even if it was in the classroom, so what? It's simply showing what Democracy can be. It was not shown on the program last night, but one of the documents read by Matt Damon was the Declaration of Independence, which was written by the founders of our country. Would you equate them with "terrorists"? I guess if you were English you would. Suffice to say, if you think freedom of speech and the right to persue life, liberty and happiness, where all people are created equal and should have equal rights, if you think all of this is harassy or diluting the morals of America, then you are living in the wrong country and the wrong century.

  • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

    Ok, this is my last post on the subject. I know I've written a novel here, but this deserved a proper response and I assume if you didn't want discussion, you wouldn't allow comments, so I hope you'll forgive me.

    But anyway, America has its upsides and its downsides. Believe it or not, there are shows on the history channel and others that show Americas victories and advantages. Having a show that might only focus on the negative (if, indeed, that is all this program will do) is not going to turn people into terrorists. People are capable of critical thought and viewing complex issues in complex ways. We don't all think in black and white absolutes.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/perfidy2012 perfidy2012

      wow Trace, tell us how you really feel

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/MCGIRV MCGIRV

    I'll never watch any of this pinko commies movies!

  • Greg Victor

    Trace:
    I appreciate your comments. For one thing, it is clear that you care about history.. and that is always a good thing. My main objection to the Zinn version of history is that it carried with it theoretical baggage.. and that always gets in the way of seeing the many sides of an event.
    Thanks for the valid response though. I just fear that the way teaching history is headed, we are losing some sort of useful agreed-upon synthesis of all the sides.

    • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

      See, that is completely valid and if there are falsehoods or politically motivated lies or distortions,then I'll be right there with you condemning this as tripe. The article didn't really go into what falsehoods there were, and seemed more to be talking to people who already had their minds made up about this, rather than newcomers to the issue, and so I can only really comment on what was offered there.

      Perhaps I'm being unfair to the author of the article, but the knee-jerk "They hate America, they just hate capitalism" thing was said a lot during the last eight years over very arbitrary reasons. Don't support the war? You just hate the troops, hate America, hate freedom, love the terrorists. That sort of thing. It's a dogwhistle to some, but for me, the Pavlovian response has now become "This person is employing straw men to dodge a real issue."

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Bohemond Bohemond

    Trace:

    It's not just Zinn's idological baggage, the the outright *falsehoods* that pack his book. Historians are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

    • http://www.wonkette.com Trace

      What are some of the specific falsehoods, though? This is what I need to know. If the show is full of them, I'm not going to waste my time watching it. I don't need that irritation, nor do I want to tolerate or validate liars. There are other things to watch on TV.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/BeefSupreme BeefSupreme

    "Once academia happily accepted that objectivity was impossible, anything else was fair game. Explaining history no longer was about asking who, what, when, where, and why. It was about lining up chosen facts to support a subjective interpretation."

    In my opinion, actors should stay where they belong, in movie theaters and on DVD; not in the classroom. Same thing goes for Obama.

  • Pingback: Parcbench: Matt Damon Rewrites History | NewsReal Blog

  • http://www.jamestreysopinion.blogspot.com Trey

    I agree that there's nothing wrong with discussing the less known events of our past, but to do so at the expense of replacing our rich and noble (for the most part) history with a self bashing, hard left, anti capitalist rewrite of history is unacceptable and must be combatted.

  • chad kerst

    Hmmm. Maybe you should have taken time out from your rigorous *ahem* history study to take a logic course. There isn't an argument here, just a whole slew of ad hominem and rhetoric. So, let me know when you folks are interested in validity and soundness instead of huffing and puffing horrendous nonsense.

    BTW, to help measure how absurd your argument is: Given your argument, If Matt Damon were to say 2+2=4 I would have to consider him wrong…because he is just an actor.
    How about showing me, specifically, where he is wrong. Show me some factual errors. Oh wait, you can't…because you haven't even seen the thing yet. Nice work folks. Way to make conservatives look like irrational baffoons.

    • chris

      No in Matt Damon's world he'd claim 2+2=5 because 2+2=4 is so oppressive to the freedom of all mathkind.

  • xxx

    The reason why college educated people tend to be more liberal is because they are exposed to all kinds of ideas. They begin to question their previous beliefs. They are more critical and tend not to believe all the bullshit that is spewed from the class elites and their puppets.

  • http://www.bluecorncomics.com Rob Schmidt

    I think it's hysterical that conservatives here equate reading historical documents with telling people how to think. Amazingly, you don't get the difference between primary evidence–firsthand accounts of events–and opinions or analyses. No wonder you cheered Bush's invasion of Iraq despite his lies about WMDs. You basically don't understand the concept of facts or evidence.

    Really, you're criticizing Matt Damon for reading the Declaration of Independence? What, did he leave out the part about how God gave America to the white man to use as he saw fit? Boo-hoo, you crybabies. Sorry if "The People Speak" upset your myths and fantasies about America the holy land.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lionheart9 Lionheart9

    Greg Victor seems to be missing the point that what was read by these actors were the words of people who were eye-wittnesses and part of history. If that's not fact, then what is? Victor seems to think the "totality of an historical event" is only what brings glory and renown, but the word "totality" means looking at everything – both good and bad.

    Yes, this program focused on "America's sins and failings" but that is because they are real and part of our history. America is NOT perfect! Just because the history books don't report it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. These eye-wittness accounts prove it, time and again. This program dared to show the darker side of American history. Like it or not – this history belongs to us. Instead of critisizing it, we should learn from it.

    As for the people and performers who produced it – don't kill the messenger, even if he is just a leftist, liberal actor, or a "marxist academic". The material is what's important. It happened – in America, so that would make it American history. Thus it belongs on the History Channel.

  • kiss

    I’m glad I read through you’re peace of renting crap. I was thinking about finding all your flawless peace of information… It’s so much full of real accurate information. I think someone payed to much for there history classes? keep on looking for you’re history. It will be out there some ware in never land.

    • gary

      Uh dude…forget history class and get thee to an English/writing/spelling class!

  • Pingback: ‘24’ Creator Takes on Kennedy Legacy, The Left Gags | NewsReal Blog

  • Pingback: ‘24’ Creator Takes on Kennedy Legacy, The Left Gags | Blog on Fitness-Jewelry