These migrants were portrayed as a problem since the original American inhabitants viewed them as invaders. This brought about social disharmony among the people, and it compromised the process of social cohesion and integration among the people. By 1930s, many texts emphasized on the gap between “the immigrants” and Americans. This gap widened because the Americans did not learn how to live with these people. By the 1940s, the issue of immigrants had become a contentious issue. All the texts written during that period focused on immigrants and the social collapse they had caused.
There was a clear distinction between the original Americans and the immigrants. The foreigners were discriminated against by the Americans. By I960s, texts ceased to talk of the immigrants as being distinct from the Americans. This was facilitated by the civil right activists who condemned the discrimination in the country. In the mid 60s history reconstruction was written. The rewriting of history was meant to bridge the gap between people of different races. In the 20th century, the issue has been resolved through condemnation of racial discrimination.
Social conflicts have been minimized, and people of different races can live harmoniously. ‘The historian and his facts’ ‘The historian and his facts’ outline what defines history and the role of facts used in defining history. It emphasizes that facts should lay out directly how history should be written. The article extrapolates on the need of imaginative understanding when writing history. History should be viewed as a continuous dialogue between the past and present. History should be an outline of the historians facts. In addition, the historian should be ready to respond to critics.
This will ensure that the historian uses credible facts in his/her quest to rewrite history. Similarities ‘Rewriting American history’ and ‘the historian and his facts’ are similar in the sense that both articles focus on the rewriting of history. In both articles, history is a continuous process which bridges the past and present. History shows how past events have influenced the present. In both articles, the historian provides credible facts to substantiate the contents of his work. Both articles focus on how history has been used as a tool of transformation.
History highlights the past events and shows how the outcomes of the events can be used to educate and transform the lives of people. Differences ‘Rewriting American history’ focuses wholly on the American history. ‘Historian and his facts’, on the other hand, gives a general view of how a historian should use facts in defining history. ‘Rewriting American history’ outlines a series of events that took place in America between the 19th and the 20th century. On the contrary, ‘historian and his facts’ does not track any past events. It gives the overview of how the historian should go about with the rewriting of history.