This week, I’ve been reading about nationalism (or patriotism, which often has similar effects) and the inherent biases that stem from it.
At this point, I’m inclined to believe that anyone who feels even a hint of defensiveness when their country—whether by birth or adoption—is criticized should refrain from writing history about any country in the world. National loyalty, even in moderate doses, tends to bias perceptions, often fostering negative or dismissive attitudes toward other nations.
This would also apply to people who display national pride in seemingly benign areas, such as cheering only for their own country in sports competitions.
Unfortunately, if we were to follow this standard, it would disqualify almost everyone from becoming a historian, whether professional or amateur.
I suspect a similar issue arises in politics. A historian who holds strong opinions—whether in support of or opposition to a figure like Trump, or any particular ideology, such as “woke” politics—is likely to carry biases that could shape their interpretation of events.
Given this challenge, history may require an even more rigorous system than the scientific peer review process to ensure objectivity. Perhaps historians should always team up with historians that have the opposite bias?
Friday 16 December 2022