Historical Context

 Doesn't exist. 

As Dr. Bulhof taught us lo those decades ago in our Philosophy of History course, there is chronology, or the effort to list events sequentially in their proper location, and history. which places event, people, and locations in relationship to one another in ways that disclose their meaning in a particular situation contemporary to the historian. History itself has a historical context.

In theory chronology  is more factual, but it usually isn’t. The way we label events is already a subjective judgement on them. If a person is shot and dies do we label it murder, or  war, or terrorism, or martyrdom? Every label is a moral judgment. Moreover chronology is inevitably selective. It includes what the chronicler thinks are important events, and leaves out the rest. Chronology cannot escape becoming history.

This is why history must constantly be rewritten. I wrote a biography (a particular kind of history) that was published in Southeast Asia in 1994. It went through a few editions and sold well in its market because it put a people and events from 1863 to 1948 into relationships that revealed meanings relevant to the 1990's in Malaysia and Singapore. It answered some questions people were asking at the time.

Today it would need to be rewritten, not because new facts have come to light, but because there are new questions, issues, and problems that the study of that period and those people need to address. Or, and this is possible, all of that will become irrelevant as our contemporary world finds nothing further of value in exploring that particular facet of the end of colonial Christianity. 

The point here is that history is always subjective. It always involves putting in some facts and leaving out other facts to create a narrative that helps explain the world we live in today. It always involves labeling events, and thus giving them a moral meaning. The only objective history would ultimately be dehumanizing, because part of being human is being subjects in our own history; writing our own story. 

If there is no objective history, there is good history. Good history helps us understand our current situation. Bad history causes misunderstanding. It may refer to real events and place them in chronological order. But it puts them in relationship to one another in a way that obscures their meaning for our present reality. Bad history is just propaganda used to create the moral justification for our actions without helping us see their consequences. Good history helps us understand how others understand themselves so that we can begin to work together.

There is a lot of bad history going around these days. Indeed, in popular discourse, particularly political discourse, almost every appeal to history is actually just propaganda; appealing to bad history to obscure reality and to justify a particular course of action. 

From bad history there develop alternative narratives within which different people place their personal and communal histories; explaining and justifying their experiences and actions. But these bad history narratives leave people incapable of arriving at better outcomes. 

It becomes hopeless to try and arbitrate between these narratives. They have become a major source of personal and communal identity. An outsider asking people to change their narrative is asking people, or a people, to change who they are and who they understand themselves to be. It is asking them to die a certain kind of death. And no one wants to be asked to die. Peoples with bad narratives must almost inevitably change their own story. There isn't much the rest of us can do. 

Which can lead us to paralysis when action is called for in a serious conflict; a war. It is tempting to take sides, privileging one narrative over another. This can help one side temporarily dominate the other. But victory isn't the same as peace and does not necessarily lead to peace; as we can readily see in recent history. 

The only possible approach to making peace when two or more different narratives justify war is for the parties in conflict to create a common history together. It is to find a means by putting the unchangeable past behind them and through ongoing dialogue and mutual action create a new history going forward. It has been done. And fortunately there are those dedicated to doing it, not least among Israelis and Palestinians. There is probably no one who can tell them to do it. 

And in the meantime? Humane action to preserve human life is always possible and necessary. And blessed.