I have a profound love for history. I relish reading about its various aspects, delight in memorizing the details, enjoy questioning the established narratives, and take great pleasure in uncovering new interpretations of significant events. Given my passion, one would assume that I would have a wonderful affinity with this particular book.

Throughout my life, I have read and derived enjoyment from some rather dry non-fiction works. However, I must admit that I found this book to be a bit of a chore. Additionally, I already had prior knowledge of most of the astonishing untruths that were disclosed within its pages.

I am of the opinion that this book would only hold real value for those who have not been paying attention. But unfortunately, those individuals are not the kind who would be able to persevere through this book in its current form. Consequently, I find it rather difficult to envision to whom I could recommend this book.

Wonderful read for students of American History and sociologists. In the late 80s and early 90s, Loewen conducted a fabulous study of American History textbooks. What he discovered was a narrative that lacked depth, diversity, and excitement. He was indeed right. Most texts still adhered to the "great white father's" narrative of American history that our parents and grandparents learned throughout the 20th century. American history, from Columbus to Lincoln to Vietnam and everything in between, had been presented in black and white terms. There were clear heroes and villains, Presidents and rebels, with democracy triumphing over all and America leading the world to a better life and freedom. However, there was very little of the gray area that makes history truly interesting and real. Life is not black and white, and neither is history. Loewen points out these missing gray areas, such as racial tensions, the terrible treatment of Native Americans, and the flawed human beings behind the Presidents. These are the stories that our teachers didn't tell us but should have. They are the stories that provoke discussion, thought, and understanding, better than simple hero worship or the glorification of Presidents or Generals. These are the stories that Loewen encourages authors to include in textbooks.

Since the publication of this book, much of the textbook narrative of American history has finally caught up with historical scholarship. This is still an important and useful read. It forces us to think about the way our history is told and constructed by those who write the textbooks and disseminate the information. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in American history, and as a teacher, I found Loewen's perspective to be invaluable.

It is all well and fine for people to criticize historians for being snobs about who writes the history books.

However, this book serves as a great example of what can go awry when non-historians attempt to pen history.

Every single thing in this book is ripped out of its proper context.

Consequently, at best, it is skewed, and at worst, it is simply incorrect.

Context is everything.

Nothing occurs in a vacuum.

Historical events that are presented out of context are merely stories, and often not very good ones at that.

One cannot truly understand the significance and implications of historical events without considering the surrounding circumstances and the broader historical backdrop.

Non-historians may lack the necessary expertise and knowledge to accurately place events in their proper context, leading to misinterpretations and inaccuracies in their accounts.

This book is a prime illustration of the importance of leaving the writing of history to those who have dedicated their lives to studying and understanding the past.

This was an eye-opening look at real American history.

Did your teacher or college professor ever inform you that Christopher Columbus, far from being the hero we all believed, was responsible for the genocide of a million people in Haiti as he "claimed" that territory for Spain? And did you know that Helen Keller was a communist who fought for a socialist America throughout her lifetime, even risking charges of treason?

Also, American Indians died in large numbers from diseases that Europeans brought over during their explorations. Or that Jamestown was already settled by American Indians when the Smiths arrived in 1620, yet they conquered it and claimed they had settled it? Other topics such as slavery, women's rights, American Indian rights, and past US Presidents were also discussed.

Our common heroes, some even with National Holidays, are not that heroic at all. In fact, some are downright evil. I had no idea! Mainstream (public) education, both in high school and college, does not even expose us to our own true history because that does not promote patriotism. I understand why: the true history of America is crude, uncomfortable, evil, and full of greed.

Despite the somewhat depressing context (depressing because we were lied to), this is a fantastic read for those who like the truth. However, for the average person, you may be bored after a few chapters.

We've all had that nagging feeling that the real history of the United States is not what we were taught in school. As we grow up, we have these subtle revelations. For instance, we realize that the Founding Fathers were slaveholders, and that Nixon did more than just the Watergate scandal. This makes us aware that we didn't get the full story during our formative years.

This book validates all of those suspicions. History didn't just unfold randomly. There were causes and effects. This cause-and-effect relationship is precisely what was lacking in my personal Social Studies courses. History courses often present the subject as a series of inevitable events, rather than a complex web of possibilities and choices.

For example, nobody taught us the root causes of racism, the reasons behind the Great Depression, the true nature of the conflict with the Native Americans, or the exact motives for the Civil War. These events seemed to just happen on their own, without any buildup or explanation. This book fills in many of those crucial gaps.

I was completely unaware that Helen Keller was a radical socialist. I also never knew that Woodrow Wilson was a blatant racist, and that under his administration, local and state governments felt emboldened to institutionalize Jim Crow and other segregation laws. Racism and segregation pre-dated Wilson, but his support made them an accepted part of the social fabric. One thing led to another. My history courses never made this clear, and as a result, history seemed dull and uninteresting.

The book also shows that social class has always been a part of American society. It reveals that school textbooks go to great lengths to dispel the idea that America is anything but a classless society where anyone can succeed through hard work. In reality, success is often tied to lineage and environment, not just individual determination.

This doesn't mean that successful people can't come from humble beginnings, but school often presents these exceptions as the norm. A quick look at the poverty-stricken immigrants at the turn of the 20th century is enough to prove otherwise. America was supposed to be the Land of Opportunity, but for many immigrants, it was a place of drudgery and prejudice.

Another area lacking in American history is the coverage of the Vietnam War. Even this book is somewhat scant in its examination of what the war was truly about. The point is, we're still not entirely sure what we were fighting for. If we can't figure it out now, we certainly didn't know it back then.

There are so many myths that need to be debunked in the American consciousness. Columbus was not a heroic figure; North America was not an untamed wilderness when he arrived; most of our military actions in foreign countries are driven by large business interests rather than humanitarian concerns; and the reason the Middle East has issues with us is because of our invasions, repression, and resource theft, not because they envy our "freedoms."

History textbooks are unlikely to change anytime soon, but we are adults. We can accept that much of what we learned was either a blatant lie or a lie by omission. We have the ability to think for ourselves and form our own opinions. This is how school should be teaching us to think.

This book truly made me reevaluate everything that I had recalled from my high school history classes.

I was raised in New England, and astonishingly, I had never known the real truth about the First Thanksgiving!

It is both infuriating and liberating. This is indeed one of the finest non-fiction books I have ever perused. The reason being that it reignited my passion for history and compelled me to search for more reliable sources.

My Thermo professor during my engineering undergraduate days constantly emphasized in our minds: "check your sources, check your sources." Well, this book really emphasized the necessity of doing the same for history.

Undoubtedly, history is often written by the victors. However, there are other versions of events, and they are far from as glorious as the patriotic enthusiasts would like us to believe.

If we pull the thread hard enough, the carefully crafted fabric of the tapestry that is used to justify the atrocities begins to unravel, revealing the rather pitiful individual behind the curtain: the sugar-coated racial supremacist.

Is this too extreme? Then read the book. It is a must-read in our household.

Loewen highlights numerous issues regarding the teaching of history in this country. There are more problems than I was even aware of, and I've had many disputes with both my history teachers and those of my kids over the decades. (My US History teacher completely disregarded the Pentagon Papers when I studied it in 1974!) Loewen initially reviewed a dozen history books, and this edition includes another six. Although they have improved in some aspects, they are still teaching blatant lies, half-truths, and boring kids with dull pronouncements. They also teach an excessive amount and include too many factoids, which results in presenting icons rather than real people making difficult decisions. There is no understanding of the tides of change. They don't encourage any form of critical thinking or further reading and research.

I would have preferred a shorter version of this. While it was well-narrated, it is very repetitive. He repeatedly emphasizes the same points about how the textbooks failed, condemning them for only telling part of the story while sometimes doing the same himself. 3 or 4 stars? 5 for the basics, 2 for the delivery. 3.5 rounded up.

He begins with a good, moderate agenda, but then veers quite far to the left, which causes him to fall victim to many of the same issues he correctly criticizes in the textbooks. For example, he mentions Thomas Jefferson's 'fortune' but not his mostly self-imposed financial difficulties or how crucial the black vote was in electing him. There is no mention of the laws or the fate of many 'freed' slaves, especially at the time of his death. He also doesn't mention why Andrew Jackson hated Indians so much. He initially gives the impression that the succession of the southern states was uniform when it was actually much more complex for many, especially in the border states. (Kentuckians in Gray: Confederate Generals and Field Officers of the Bluegrass State & Beautiful Jim Key: The Lost History of a Horse and a Man Who Changed the World show how conflicted KY & TN were.) He eventually does touch on how conflicting goals undermined the Confederacy, but he overstates the state of their armed forces towards the end of the war. He fails to mention how depleted their treasury was or the state of their trade and economy.

In making his point about the stratification of US society, he compares US company CEOs' wages to that of factory workers in Bangladesh, which completely undermines what had been a good section. How can I trust his analysis when he makes such leaps and omissions?

Arguable Point: He includes both Bacon's and Shay's Rebellions as part of class wars, not the way I would categorize them. If I did, I would at least mention the Whiskey Rebellion in the same context. He didn't. In my opinion, the first was over stealing Indian land. The other two were about nearly bankrupt governments desperate to make ends meet. The irony of Sam Adams writing the Riot Act or George Washington sending Federal troops against US citizens should always be mentioned. The rural poor were certainly more affected than the rich in both cases, so I suppose that is his justification. It seems too simplistic to me.

The last two points are more than halfway through the book and the first time he delves into economics. It gives the impression that he doesn't know or understand the economics underlying the situations he has framed in sociological terms. Throughout the book, I kept wondering about the lack of economic reasoning. I was also disappointed when he condemned us for not spending as much of our GDP on foreign aid as some other countries, but never mentioned a dollar amount or how that is calculated. From what I've read, it varies greatly.

I am disappointed that he didn't take a broader view of history geographically, politically, and over time. As the book progresses, he condemns the US for its hypocrisy - teaching a sanitized version while doing some rather heinous things. He's right, we have and do, but he becomes increasingly strident about it without putting it into any broader context. He spends a significant amount of time on slavery, race, and social issues without comparing them to the rest of the world at the time. He makes it seem as if our interference in other countries is only done for greed. He doesn't mention the other players and contests going on. Even a brief summary of President Thomas Jefferson's dealings with the Barbary Pirates is astonishing in many ways.

He mentions how the revelations about Nixon and the Vietnam War severely damaged our trust in the government, but he fails to mention that sources other than the standard history books he reviewed have also made these betrayals clear and how often they are uncovered today. A People's History of the United States (1980) by Zinn is a well-known refutation and is often used in schools, yet he never mentions it. He simplifies situations into the same stupidity he claims to detest. Disappointing.

He is also asking for the impossible in some cases. He wants more information in the books while also complaining about them being too large. Each decade adds even more to our story. As a high school student, I was only able to take one year of US History. It's absurd to think that a single school year is sufficient to absorb even a brief, basic overview, much less leave time for discussion. If kids had to read Hakim's Joy Hakim's \\"A History of US\\" books from grade 4 to 7 or 8, they could spend more time discussing in high school. He mentions Hakim's books but doesn't actually say they should be used.

He points out and then seems to forget that these books also have to pass the scrutiny of school boards. These are the same bodies that have banned classics from libraries. He does pick this up again in one of the last chapters. In the afterword, he finally offers some solutions, but I wish they had come sooner and been more evenly distributed among the condemnations.

All of this makes it seem as if I have many problems with this book. Not really. From a factual perspective, it started out better than most and it does point out a huge, terrible problem. I just wish he hadn't repeated himself so often or undermined his arguments by only presenting part of the story. That's just ironic.

As a history major in college, I have always had a deep affinity for the subject. It is truly fascinating to explore the past and understand how it has shaped our present.

This book that I recently read was extremely interesting. It had the power to challenge many of the things that we were all taught in the American educational system.

It served as a real eye opener. We may have had a superficial knowledge of some of the events and trends that were either never taught or were taught in a way that the real issues were glossed over. However, this book delved into them in great depth.

I would highly recommend this book, even if you are not particularly into history. It has the ability to make you think critically and gain a new perspective on the world around us.

Re-reading the updated version, I still find it to be excellent. It is a must-read for anyone who wants to expand their knowledge and understanding of history.

The reason I'm giving this book such a high rating is that it is extremely thought-provoking.

Loewen examined 12 common American history textbooks and analyzed the content in terms of historical accuracy and bias. Not surprisingly, all of them presented a highly sanitized and optimistic view of American history.

His contention is that most of the textbooks in use are very Euro-centric, marginalizing minorities (especially African Americans and Native Americans). They "heroify" major historical figures to such an extent that any faults or human qualities are ignored. They suppress the possibility of critical thinking by avoiding controversy. They rely so heavily on memorization that students cram for tests and then forget the information to make room for the facts in the next chapter. They are factually inaccurate because they repeat information from old textbooks without referring to new historical research. They exclude primary sources... and there are likely some other important points that I'm forgetting.

I concur with most of these conclusions, but to prove them, Loewen was a bit too extreme in the opposite direction. To make his point, the book ended up presenting a very sensationalized version of American history, as he only included the worst examples of our past to show what was omitted. By the end, I was worn out.

Ultimately, I finished the book realizing that I have many gaps to fill in my knowledge of American history, especially in the recent past. Although I already knew that it is impossible to write an unbiased history, it has made me more conscious of how to study history more objectively and evaluate my sources more critically.

Wow. I didn't mean to write an essay. My apologies.

Review to come. This simple statement holds a certain anticipation. It implies that a detailed assessment or evaluation is即将到来. Maybe it's a review of a book, a movie, a product, or an event. People often look forward to reviews as they can provide valuable insights and help them make informed decisions. Whether it's to determine if a particular item is worth purchasing or if an experience is worth having, the upcoming review has the potential to influence our choices. We wait with bated breath, eager to see what the reviewer will have to say. Will it be a glowing recommendation or a scathing critique? Only time will tell, but until then, the anticipation continues to build.

I had never liked history during my school days or high school years.

It was only later that I began to develop an interest in history through various means such as the History Channel, movies, and actually visiting historical sites.

I truly wish I had come across this book when I was younger because it is extremely enlightening.

It not only provides valuable insights into history itself but also delves into the reasons behind the lack of interest in history among students and adults.

The author has chosen to cover only 10 important topics in American history, yet after reading this book, I feel that I have a much better understanding of them compared to what I had in high school.

This book has opened my eyes to the significance and relevance of history, and I would highly recommend it to anyone who wants to gain a deeper appreciation for the past.

It serves as a reminder that history is not just a collection of facts and dates but a rich tapestry of human experiences that can teach us valuable lessons for the present and the future.

Did you hate your elementary and high school American history classes? I surely did, and this book has managed to put into words precisely why.

In the initial paragraph, the author details how present-day textbooks inundate students with a plethora of facts that they are supposed to memorize without any real significance or connections. I have always been dreadful at history and often assert that it is my least favored subject. While part of it may be my fault, the problem extends to the entire nation due to the textbooks utilized for teaching history.

This book is partly a history textbook and partly a pedagogical perspective. The reason my rating is divided is that I had anticipated learning about every single error in history textbooks. The topics covered in this book include Christopher Columbus, the treatment of Native Americans, the lack of addressing racism, Abraham Lincoln, the federal government, the Vietnam War, and how the recent past is not taught. Clearly, it overlooks numerous significant historical events. However, the central takeaway is that textbooks fail to address the events when America was in the wrong (and there are many). There is also a common theme that everything ultimately turns out right, so students need not worry about the events currently unfolding.

This ethnocentric approach is implemented to preserve patriotism, yet it has negative consequences as students are unable to explain America's past and its influence on the present.

I believe this is an excellent book if you are interested in learning more about how schools teach American history and about very specific examples. Another issue raised is how almost every textbook is word for word identical, yet claims to be written by different authors. I am definitely not a history expert after finishing this book, but I have gained an understanding as to why history was always my least favorite subject.