Poor history is bad enough. Bent history is worse.
I agree with the author that we need to teach an unvarnished version of American history. What I would add however is that we continue to erase our history of genocide against native Americans. Millions were killed with the full cooperation and support of the federal and state governments in order to steal their land. The remaining few are ignored and ostracized unless they assimilate into the culture of their oppressors. Any discussion of American culture and past and present racism must consider the past and ongoing oppression of indigenous peoples.
This article conflates several different issue, so it's hard to know what the author is arguing, other than "the left is always correct and the right always wrong". It's so tiresome that neither the left nor right will grant *anything* to their cultural opposition.
I quite agree that students need to be taught the centrality of slavery as the cause of the Civil War and that the lies of the "Lost Cause" need to be exposed. The early termination of Reconstruction is also important and the creation of the Jim Crow South is heartbreaking.
That doesn't mean, however, that we need a separate course to impart such information. This is simply history and belongs in an American History course. African American History, like all culturally relevant coursework, is designed to bolster the self-esteem of disadvantaged communities, rather than impart the information students need to succeed in life. Educators have lost sight of what we, the community, have hired them to do; they instead see themselves as agents of cultural transformation, which many of them are proud to admit. The arrogance is astonishing.
The academic left needs to make sure what is taught in history courses is correct, but they also need careful not to use the coursework as vehicles for their own ideology. Which, yes, they sometimes do.