In recent years, the destruction of historical monuments and the rewriting of narratives have sparked strong debates. This phenomenon, often driven by “presentism,” involves the introduction of present-day ideas and perspectives into depictions or interpretations of the past. In short “presentism” could be defined as judging past events through the lens of today’s standards. While this temptation of applying modern values to our understanding of history seems appealing to the cultural bias we are currently witnessing, we risk having a distorted understanding of the subject or event in its time and place in history. But then the questions arise: Is it a good idea to follow the past? Can we learn from previous generations or should we run the society based on current time affairs? To experience this, the book “Twin Populist Reform Warriors 500 Years Apart,” by Pastor Paul F. Swartz can make the journey easy.
Presentism frequently reduces historical figures to particular actions. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, for instance, are often primarily defined by their roles as slave owners, ignoring their broader contributions as Founding Fathers. While it’s important to recognize what can be viewed today as moral failings, reducing their legacies to this one height overshadows their historical significance and their efforts in establishing the foundational democratic principles of our country.
In his book, Swartz discusses how presentism can easily misrepresent historical understanding and over-simplify complex legacies. Removing statues and renaming buildings does not change history but instead changes our ability to understand it fully within its context. For example, Martin Luther was once declared a heretic and excommunicated by the Church under Pope Leo X and as an enemy of the State by Emperor Charles V. Through time, however, his legacy was changed as the one who “re-discovered” the Gospel and changed the world and in 2000 was recognized as one of the most influential individuals shaping the past Millennium. Obviously, Protestant Christian denominations hold him and his theology in high regard and the Roman Catholic Church in more recent re-evaluations of Luther are viewing his significance with some of their theologians even calling the Reformer “a prophet to the Church Catholic.”
Today, historical figures like Robert E. Lee face similar treatment. He is either given no respect or celebrated without a complete understanding of his context. Swartz explains that understanding historical context is crucial because it allows us to see how figures like Lee reconciled their beliefs over time. Before the Civil War, Lee freed the slaves he inherited and supported national reconciliation afterwards. By selectively viewing him as either purely evil or righteous, we risk losing valuable lessons about the human struggle between ideals and reality.
The book emphasizes that history should be treated as a resource for both lessons and inspiration. As historian James S. Robbins notes, “History is better served by adding than subtracting [heroes] from the American story.” This positive approach doesn’t mean ignoring past injustices but understanding them within their historical context. Learning from the past requires acknowledging flaws while appreciating the progress made.
Presentism is problematic because it prevents us from understanding broader societal shifts that shape today’s world. Recent examples include efforts to rewrite American history curricula, remove statues, and sanitize historical documents. While these actions often have good intentions, they risk removing valuable intuitions. For instance, recognizing the contradictions of figures like Thomas Jefferson allows us to see how ideals like “all men are created equal” can coexist with personal failings. By doing so, we better understand how deeply in-built biases have affected society.
Readers today can connect to Swartz’s message by acknowledging that revising history should not be about deleting imperfections but providing a new enlightened, and sometimes surprising, perspective. This approach builds a wider view of our shared heritage, where progress is celebrated and mistakes are used as learning opportunities. By doing this, we honor the progress made while working for continued growth and improvement. In a world increasingly divided by identity and ideology, finding common ground in our historical legacy can inspire unity, compassion, and a commitment to learn from the past to “form a more perfect union”.
