My friend, the historian Niall Ferguson, recently posted something remarkable on social media.
Read more Utah-made wheels help power Tadej Pogačar’s Tour de France dominance
Reflecting on the resurgence of antisemitism, Holocaust denial and what he called the “anti-history” engulfing much of the world, Ferguson reached a painful conclusion. “The goal of my entire career as an historian was to ensure that citizens learned the lessons of history. … Yet today … anti-history is spreading like a cancer. The Holocaust is either denied or derided. I have to admit: I failed utterly.”
His words resonated with me because they capture what many Jews are experiencing today. I understand why he feels defeated, but I simply don’t think defeat and failure are the same thing.
The purpose of historians
Antisemitism has returned to the mainstream. Holocaust denial has become fashionable and even expected in some circles. And far too many young people are historically ignorant and seem detached from even the most basic knowledge of the past.
But I think Niall reached the wrong conclusion about both his work and that of history more generally.
He did not fail. Rather, he expected history to accomplish work that history has never been able to achieve on its own.
His mistake was understandable. Historians preserve the past. Their task is to recover it, explain it, place it in context and protect it from distortion. That is indispensable work. However, preserving the past and transmitting it are different responsibilities. Historians can document a civilization. They cannot, by themselves, persuade civilizations to remember.
The Jewish tradition has understood that distinction for thousands of years. Judaism — my own faith — never assumed that facts speak for themselves or that historical knowledge automatically becomes moral wisdom. Instead, it taught those lessons around the dinner table, in the synagogue, and from one generation to the next.
Remember
The Hebrew word is zachor — remember. It is not advice; it is a command and is an idea that I first encountered when I was in elementary school. I vividly recall being taught to remember that we were strangers in Egypt, that we must remember Amalek and the Sabbath, and that very Covenant itself is sacred.
Former Columbia University professor Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi observed in his landmark book, “Zakhor,” that “remember” appears in the Hebrew Bible no fewer than 169 times, with either God or Israel as its subject and that is no accident. Memory, in Judaism, is not simply a feeling or an act of nostalgia — it is an obligation.
We have become very good at preserving information, but much less good at passing on memory.
Yerushalmi’s central insight in “Zakhor” was that history grows more important precisely when memory grows weaker. As the ordinary practices that carried Jewish memory from one generation to the next became less secure, Jews increasingly turned to writing history. History expanded as memory contracted.
That is a lesson worth remembering far beyond the Jewish experience. We often assume that historical knowledge is enough — that if people learn the facts, they will reach the right conclusions. But facts alone do not sustain a civilization. Judaism has always demanded something more: not simply that we know the past, but that we remember it.
The holiday of Passover may be the clearest example. Every year Jews gather around the Seder table not simply to recall the Exodus but to enter it. The Haggadah instructs every person to see himself as if he personally came out of Egypt. Parents tell the story and children interrupt with questions; this is celebrated and encouraged. Meals, songs, ritual and repetition give the story emotional weight until it becomes part of a family’s identity rather than simply another historical event.
Read more 3 things became clear from John Marino’s contract extension
That is how Jewish memory survived nearly 2,000 years of exile, persecution, dispersion and hate. History and scholarly pursuits certainly mattered and remain central to Jewish life, but they were never sufficient. For centuries, families, synagogues, schools and local communities carried memory together until it became woven into the rhythm of ordinary Jewish life.
What has changed
Many of those institutions — Jewish and non-Jewish alike — are weaker today. Families spend less time together. Religious participation has declined. Voluntarism has declined. Civic organizations have withered. Schools often struggle to transmit a shared civic inheritance.
I do not need polling to tell me something has changed. I have seen the resurgence of antisemitism where I teach, online where anonymity magnifies hatred, and on the streets of New York while walking with my children. What Ferguson describes is not an abstraction. It is part of daily Jewish life once again.
It is tempting to blame social media and artificial intelligence for what we see today. I think that gets the causal arrow backward. AI and social media did not create this problem. They exposed our cultural weaknesses. We have become very good at preserving information, but much less good at passing on memory.
Communities survive because they hand something down. Historians record that inheritance. Families and institutions transmit it.
Immediately after the Shema, Jews are commanded: “You shall teach them diligently to your children.” That command assumes something important. Memory is fragile and if neglected or ignored, even the most important truths disappear.
Bernard-Henri Lévy recognized this almost immediately when he responded to Ferguson online. “No, dear Niall,” he wrote, “this is not a failure; it is a defeat. … Antisemitism may win battles, but not the war.”
Handing down memory
Lévy was making a profoundly Jewish point. Judaism has never confused survival with uninterrupted success. The covenant never promised that evil would disappear or that exile would never come. Instead, it made remembering part of everyday Jewish life — in homes, holidays, prayer and study. That is how the story endured.
Historians preserve the past. They recover forgotten truths, challenge falsehoods and help us understand where we have been. But they cannot do the work of memory. That responsibility belongs to families, schools, congregations and communities.
That work falls to the institutions that turn history into memory. It happens around dinner tables, in classrooms, in congregations, and anywhere one generation takes responsibility for the next.
Years of studying politics, sociology and my own religious tradition have led me to the same conclusion: Communities survive because they hand something down. Historians record that inheritance. Families and institutions transmit it.
So no, Niall — my friend — you did not fail. The work to which you devoted your life still matters. I, for one, am grateful.
You did what great historians are called to do: preserve the record, challenge falsehoods and help us better understand the past. But history alone cannot carry a people or stop dangerous, irrational movements like anti-history from gaining so much power and influence. I wish it could, but that work belongs to memory — to families, congregations, schools and communities willing to pass an inheritance from one generation to the next.
Read more Both parties want a solution to the Iran war. Nobody seems to know how to end it
History preserves the past. Memory preserves a people.