minimize the inhumanity of the institution.^25 Perhaps we must conclude, mixing
a metaphor, that the power elite did not have its thumb in every pie.
Interestingly, the upper class may not even control what is taught in its
“own” history classrooms. Graduates of elite “prep” schools are more likely
than public school graduates to have encountered high school history teachers
who challenged them and diverged from rote use of textbooks. Such teachers’
success in teaching “subversively” in the belly of the upper class should
hearten us to believe that it can be done anywhere.^26 On the other hand, if
textbooks are devised by the upper class to manipulate youngsters to support
the status quo, they hardly seem to be succeeding. Instead of revering
Columbus et al., students wind up detesting history. Evidence suggests that
history textbooks and courses make little impact in increasing trust in the
United States or inducing good citizenship, however these are measured.^27
In sum, power elite theories seem to explain everything but may explain
nothing. They may credit the upper class with more power, unity, and
conscious self-interest than it has. Indeed, regarding its alleged influence on
American history textbooks, the upper class may be a scapegoat. Blaming the
power elite is comforting. Power elite theory offers tidy explanations:
educational institutions cannot reform because to do so is not in that class’s
interest, so the upper class prevents change. Accordingly, power elite theory
may create a world more satisfying and more coherent in evil than the real
world with which we are all complicit. Power elite theories thus absolve the
rest of us from seeing that all of us participate in the process of cultural
distortion. This line of thought not only excuses us from responsibility for the
sorry state of American history as currently taught, it also frees us from the
responsibility for changing it. What’s the use? Any action we might take would
be inconsequential by definition.
Upper-class control may not be necessary to explain textbook
misrepresentation, however. Special pressures in the world of textbook
publishing may account to some extent for the uniformity and dullness of
American history textbooks. Almost half the states have textbook adoption
boards. Some of these boards function explicitly as censors, making sure that
books not only meet criteria for length, coverage, and reading level, but also
that they avoid topics and treatments that might offend some parents. States
without such boards are not necessarily freer of censorship, for their screening
usually takes place on the local level, where concern about giving offense can