By: Julianna Margolin
Edited By: Sara Radovic
“I think it is politics, and I think they’re distorting what critical race theory means the same way they distorted political correctness and multiculturalism in the past. It’s just another piece of propaganda.”
– Chris Tomlinson, Author of Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth
“Remember the Alamo!” This phrase, uttered as a battle cry in the mid-1800s, can be found in most modern history textbooks in the United States. However, Bryan Burrough,
Chris Tomlinson, and Jason Stanford, the authors of Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth, argue that the American people have actually misremembered - and, even, forgotten - the true story of what happened at the Alamo.
This book, which attempts to correct revisionist and “white-washed” history, has become contentious and problematic, especially for Texas lawmakers and Republican state leaders. Conservative officials in the state have forced the cancellation of events for the book, trying to censor it and hide its details from the public.
The Battle of the Alamo, as told in history books nationwide, was part of the broader Texas war for independence from Mexico. The 1836 battle lasted for thirteen days at the Alamo Mission in San Antonio, where Texan soldiers tried to overcome the Mexican siege, finally succumbing to opposing forces on the thirteenth day of fighting. Folklore has it that over 180 Texans died at the hands of the Mexican troops, and white male figures, like the storied Davy Crockett, became widely celebrated and martyred for their courageous actions in the Battle of the Alamo. The myth of the white heroes and the events of the Alamo became further implanted and ingrained into the origins of Texas’ history when the cry, “Remember the Alamo!” became repeated at the conclusion of the Texan war for independence, when the Texans finally prevailed and the Mexicans retreated.
This tale that has been repeated for nearly 200 years to prove how bravery and victory are characteristics of the American and Texan identity often fails to recognize the darker realities of the Battle of the Alamo. Burrough, Tomlinson, and Stanford wanted to clarify how the history of this battle that seemingly paints the Mexicans as the villains and the Texans as the heroes is not entirely accurate. They describe how the battle occurred because of a dispute over ending slavery. The Mexicans wanted to abolish slavery, while the white Texans refused, creating major tensions between the two sides that ultimately led – at least in part - to the Battle of the Alamo. Concurrently, the authors of Forget the Alamo sought to properly establish the importance of the Tejanos - Texans who were originally from Mexico - in the story of the Alamo. Texas legend often tries to paint a color-line between the two sides, with the Texans being white and the Mexicans being people of color. This black-and-white depiction of the battle’s history lends itself to mythology as it fails to recognize the gray area, or the Tejanos. The Tejano people courageously fought against the Mexican troops to aid the Texans, but, unfortunately, their role is often forgotten.
The main goal of this work was to debunk what Burrough, Tomlinson, and Stanford aptly titled the “Heroic Anglo Narrative.” They wanted to highlight how the Battle of the Alamo can be somewhat attributed to the Texan desire to perpetuate slavery, and how Tejanos were key players in the battle. What seems like an innocuous history book that should be celebrated for its investigation and discovery has taken center-stage in a culture war and polarizing political debate in Texas. The Bullock Texas State History Museum was supposed to host an event to promote the book; however, in the wake of GOP outrage, especially from Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and Governor Greg Abott who serve on the museum’s board, the museum canceled the event.
In response to this cancellation, the National Coalition Against Censorship, along with many other groups that work to stop censorship and book-banning, have written to the Texas State Preservation Board of Governors and the Bullock Museum to “reinforce their responsibility to uphold free expression and avoid allowing political bias to influence what ideas the public is allowed to discuss.” The NCAC also elucidated that they “stand in support of cultural leaders in resisting political pressure and maintaining autonomy for cultural institutions.”
Outraged by this effort to censor and white-wash history, author Chris Tomlinson stated, “I think it is politics, and I think they’re distorting what critical race theory means the same way they distorted political correctness and multiculturalism in the past. It’s just another piece of propaganda.” Many Democrats nationwide called out the “hypocrisy and authoritarianism” in this move by the Texas Republican leaders, and this has contributed to the ongoing national conversation regarding the teaching of critical race theory in schools, which many progressives favor and many conservatives oppose.
Though this may seem like an isolated event centered around one book and one historical event, it brings many more issues to the fore regarding race and culture, revisionist history, education, and national politics. While this might seem like a debate with two logical sides and no real answer, it is difficult to entertain the belief that book banning is allowed and is, in fact, the answer. As seen throughout the course of time, the banning of books is representative of more than simply not publishing or promoting a text; it represents the banning of content, ideas, and themes. It imposes and impedes on every American’s right to expression. It creates a world of ignorance. It is a ban on thinking, questioning, exploring, and learning. This is an America that should not exist in the twenty-first century, and it is imperative to not only publish and promote Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth, but to teach it in schools, as every young American is entitled to learn the true history of America, not one that is told through a white, male perspective, which also happens to be objectively wrong.
If the Alamo is worth remembering, it should be remembered accurately.
[The views expressed in this article are those of the author and the author alone; they do not necessarily represent the views of all members of the first RULR Editorial Board and Rutgers University.]
Comments