We face a lot of threats today, but there is arguably none more potent than the destruction of history.

History is vital to our functioning and growing as a society, and we will be damaged to the extent that we allow it to be destroyed.

I have specifically identified two dangers that we face — ignoring history and distorting history.

Ignoring history

Ignoring history is simply not caring about what happened before we came along. It causes us to be unaware of the destructive practices that have caused great harm over the centuries, as well as the methods that have led to tremendous prosperity and success.

The apostle Paul warned the Corinthians not to ignore the mistakes that Israel made. He used history to urge the church at Corinth to do things differently than the children of Israel did when they were repeatedly reprimanded by God.

We can avoid being ignorant about history by studying history, whether pouring over documents and books, most importantly the Bible, or talking with those who have life experiences that span many years.

Distorting history

Another danger we face is the distortion of history. That is when we take history and turn it into something it never was and was never intended to be. I have identified two types of historical distortion — alteration distortion and abusive distortion.

Alteration distortion takes place when we misremember, either intentionally or lazily, the lessons of the past. Again, this can apply to horrific circumstances, such as the Holocaust, as well as great triumphs, such as putting a man on the moon for the first time. To make the case that the horrors of the Holocaust were exaggerated or the moon landing was produced in a sound stage is alteration distortion.

Abusive distortion is when we take events as they happened but misuse them in order to achieve an end. To use the examples above, it would cheapen the Holocaust and the victims who endured the horrors of Nazi concentration camps to put it in a conversation with something contemporary that is comparatively trivial. It would also be ludicrous to use the moon landing as a basis for arguing that we should start building skyscrapers on Mars.

Case study

Over the weekend, I viewed a video of the 2017 Republican nominee for governor in Virginia, Ed Gillespie. He was asked to comment on the ongoing racial controversy surrounding the man who beat him, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D), who has recently had to explain why he posed for photos in blackface.

Instead of taking personal cheap shots, Gillespie decided to use history to promote a unifying message about his state.

What a brilliant use of history to illustrate why Gov. Northam’s controversy does not define the people of Virginia.

Please understand that this is not an endorsement of Gillespie, but a case study on how powerful it is when someone uses historical context to put the issues of today in perspective.

Summary

History is powerful. We all have our own history, both personally, familially and collectively as a nation and world.

We can disagree on issues and ideologies, but history is one thing that should not be tampered with.

Note: As mentioned above, this article is in no way an endorsement of Ed Gillespie and his political career. I do not endorse political candidates, and this site does not contain political endorsements.