Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Experiencing history

Opinion

Stacey Abrams

Over the past few years, Black Georgians such as Stacey Abrams looked at history and saw opportunity, writes Goldstone.

Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images

Goldstone’s most recent book is "On Account of Race: The Supreme Court, White Supremacy, and the Ravaging of African American Voting Rights.

Few question the value of experience. Almost every parent attempts, often with great difficulty, to teach their children to acquire some experience in life before making major decisions. New hires in most businesses go through training programs to prepare them for the challenges they will face, as does just about every aspiring doctor or lawyer. Young athletes, no matter how talented, are usually brought along slowly to gain seasoning before facing veteran opponents.

Although many teenagers and the ignorant of all ages insist they can waltz into any situation and do just fine the first time out, life often teaches them that they should have been more prudent. Experience is something that they did not think they would need until they had some.

And so, predictably, the internet is rife with quotes about experience by famous people. Albert Einstein said, “The only source of knowledge is experience.” The great physician William Osler observed, “The value of experience is not in seeing much, but in seeing wisely.” The poet John Keats noted, “Nothing ever becomes real ‘til it is experienced — even a proverb is no proverb to you till your life has illustrated it.” Oscar Wilde added, with typical acidity, “Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes.” Even Oprah Winfrey has chimed in: “Turn your wounds into wisdom.”

With such widespread agreement that the past informs the present, it is something of a surprise that Americans on both sides of the political divide are so willing to brush off the most valuable source of political wisdom — our own history.


What is American history, after all, but a record of our national experience, a vehicle by which we can evaluate the decisions of the past to try to make better decisions in the future? To be a useful learning tool, however, history has to be properly recorded, fairly evaluated and taught as objectively as possible. Failure to do so creates distortion and misunderstanding, and thus renders it useless to help solve present problems and prepare for future ones.

In recent years, however, understanding our history as it actually played out has been subordinated to using the past as a political weapon. We hear all too often from the left that United States history is an unbroken line of oppression, racism, sexism and any other -ism that the venal, greedy, white male power structure foisted on helpless minorities. For the right, our past is glorious, where freedom was granted to each and every American, regardless of race, creed, color or national origin and that everyone was able to thrive within the system if only they worked hard and followed the rules. (Slavery, an obvious exception to that doctrine, is dismissed as an historical anomaly.) Thus, those on the right contend the starting line is essentially equal and those on the left insist that the privileged classes are starting 90 yards up the track in a 100-yard race.

Warping history has political consequences. If, for example, one believes that all Americans, regardless of color or origin, effectively have the same opportunities, then social programs look like giveaways to moochers rather than an attempt to redress past discrimination. If, on the other hand, one believes the United States is incurably inequitable, where no amount of false promises will prevent biased treatment under the law, then government has a responsibility to protect those whom society will not.

Both are half-truths, and that is the problem. Advocating such principles might yield short term political advantage, but it will create a weaker nation, less able to solve the nation’s problems, which at the moment are deep and acute.

Understanding history can also be a powerful tool. Black citizens of Georgia, for example, have been victims of voter suppression since just after Reconstruction. State and local governments erected transparent barriers to registration, which both state and federal courts upheld as not on their face being racially motivated. For decades, Black men and women in the state had no recourse and few were willing to risk their jobs, their homes and even their lives to try to cast a ballot.

Although the 1965 Voting Rights Act helped some, the white power structure spared no effort to stay one jump ahead of the federal government, a task that became a good deal easier in 2013, when the Supreme Court eviscerated that law in Shelby County v. Holder. As a result, in a state that is one-third Black, African Americans had virtually no power in state government, and minimal representation in Washington. Many Black Georgians felt that things had not and would not change and that participating in such a sham was a waste of time. Apathy became as big an impediment to voting as the law.

But some Black Georgians, such as Stacey Abrams, looked at history and saw opportunity. Unlike with the de jure restrictions of the Jim Crow days, and even in the face of Shelby, the best that the white power structure could do was make registering and voting massively inconvenient. They could not prevent it. What was needed was to convince Black men and women that giving their time and effort would not be futile, a task whose monumental difficulties cannot be overstated.

But Abrams and her supporters did it and in 2018, she came within 55,000 votes of defeating Brian Kemp, who used any variety of questionable ploys to win the governor’s race, including overseeing the election himself. But the opportunity was still there and Black Georgians tried again in 2020.

And this time they won.

Success did not come easily. It involved a massive effort to both register Black Georgians and then to ensure that their registrations remained valid in the face of increasingly desperate efforts to disenfranchise them. Then there were the waits — four, five, sometimes six hours in long lines to get to inadequately manned polling stations. Rural voters, the conservative base, could be in and out of their polling places in minutes.

But in the end, Joe Biden carried the state and Georgia elected a Black man and a Jew as U.S. Senators. You could have gotten better odds on Vladimir Putin winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

In two months, Black voters will again be in the position to help elect Sen. Raphael Warnock to a full term and turn Kemp out of office. It will involve navigating through yet another wave of state imposed restrictions and waiting interminably to reach the ballot box.

But this time history, which had always been the enemy, is on their side.

Read More

Could Trump’s campaign against the media come back to bite conservatives?

US President Donald Trump reacts next to Erika Kirk, widow of Charlie Kirk, after speaking at the public memorial service for right-wing activist Charlie Kirk at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, on September 21, 2025.

(Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

Could Trump’s campaign against the media come back to bite conservatives?

In the wake of Jimmy Kimmel’sapparently temporary— suspension from late-night TV, a (tragically small) number of prominent conservatives and Republicans have taken exception to the Trump administration’s comfort with “jawboning” critics into submission.

Sen. Ted Cruz condemned the administration’s “mafioso behavior.” He warned that “going down this road, there will come a time when a Democrat wins again — wins the White House … they will silence us.” Cruz added during his Friday podcast. “They will use this power, and they will use it ruthlessly. And that is dangerous.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A stethoscope lying on top of credit cards.

Enhanced health care tax credits expire at the end of 2025 unless Congress acts. Learn who benefits, what’s at risk, and how premiums could rise without them.

Getty Images, yavdat

Just the Facts: What Happens If Enhanced Health Care Tax Credits End in 2025

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

There’s been a lot in the news lately about healthcare costs going up on Dec. 31 unless congress acts. What are the details?

The enhanced health care premium tax credits (ePTCs) are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless Congress acts to extend them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Bill Spotlight: No Social Media at School Act

Rep. Angie Craig’s No Social Media at School Act would ban TikTok, Instagram & Snapchat during K-12 school hours. See what’s in the bill.

Getty Images, Daniel de la Hoz

Congress Bill Spotlight: No Social Media at School Act

Gen Z’s worst nightmare: TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat couldn’t be used during school hours.

What the bill does

Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN2) introduced the No Social Media at School Act, which would require social media companies to use “geofencing” to block access to their products on K-12 school grounds during school hours.

Keep ReadingShow less
A portrait of John Adams.

John Adams warned that without virtue, republics collapse. Today, billionaire spending and unchecked wealth test whether America can place the common good above private gain.

John Adams Warned Us: A Republic Without Virtue Cannot Survive

John Adams understood a truth that feels even sharper today: a republic cannot endure without virtue. Writing to Mercy Otis Warren in April 1776, he warned that public Virtue cannot exist in a Nation without [private virtue], and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics.” For Adams, liberty would not be preserved by clever constitutions alone. It depended on citizens who could restrain their selfish impulses for the sake of the common good.

That insight has lost none of its force. Some people do restrain themselves. They accumulate enough to live well and then turn to service, family, or community. Others never stop. Given the chance, they gather wealth and power without limit. Left unchecked, selfishness concentrates material and social resources in the hands of a few, leaving many behind and eroding the sense of shared citizenship on which democracy depends.

Keep ReadingShow less