Hayter’s article was extremely interesting to me, it was honestly surprising, because so much of black history has been left out of the common narrative in history classes and textbooks that barely skim the surface of issues such as voting rights. The story of voting rights did not end with the VRA, and it was shocking to learn of the lengths that black people in Richmond had to go to in order to get their votes heard, and even more horrifying the lengths that the white people in power went to in order to stifle their votes. Annexing a county full of white people in order to make sure that black votes had a reduced influence, so that they would not be able to elect their candidates of choice. In this case, justice prevailed after seven years, but in many cases in history, minorities have not been so lucky.
Dr. Bezio’s podcast emphasizes the way that large groups of people have been excluded throughout history, both in historical events and in the narrative of history itself. History has been defined and shared mostly by rich white men, who have had the ability to tell history from their perspective, not from the perspective of the majority, or the common people. Yet even recent history is told by the perspective of those in power, neglecting to tell the entirety of the “story’ excluding gaping parts in order to gloss over those deemed less important. It is imperative that we “rewrite” history, to include the stories and efforts of those that took place “behind the scenes,” struggles and movements that were not executed by so-called Great Men, but by the common people whose unity and perseverance made the difference these Great Men needed in order to succeed. After all, leaders do not exist without the support of their followers. Further, we need to tell the stories that do not include Great Men, movements that are not faceless but comprised of many faces, such as the voting rights movement here in Richmond.
I think you bring up a very important point that leaders don’t exist as leaders without their followers. Because of this, it’s important to learn about the history of the followers as well.
I think you bring up a really good point about white men controlling the narrative of history because they were the ones that had the access to narrate history… unfortunately, throughout history, societies and texts are defined and created by those who have the ability to create and define them. Therefore, once something is controlled by one predominant group of people, it’s hard to reverse the monopoly they hold on it.
I think you made a great point about our recent history still being recorded by powerful men. It is important to realize that even though it has become much easier for the middle class to preserve history it still is not something the working class holds in priority.
Your point about how white, powerful men in Richmond restricted voting access for Richmond’s black communities reminds me of Professor Bezio’s discussion in her podcast about invisible leaders. Although she initially gave the example of invisible leadership in a positive light, the people behind Richmond’s voting restrictions are invisible leaders in their own right. They managed to use coded legislation to marginalize and oppress the black community, without being held accountable for their actions, and without their names and histories being remembered today.