the thing about "applied history" is that it isn't a hammer, and nothing is a nail.

history in general should teach you just as much, if not more, about the importance of contingency, the breaking of patterns, than the continuities/similarities (imho)

if you want to use history to think about the present, look at the differences more than the similarities, seems counterintuitive but it's not.

in simpler words: no america isn't falling just like rome did.

the notion: "america hasn't changed at all since 1968" doesn't help you think about how to foster change today, it actually means you subscribe to a whiggish idea of progress - and that's not how change or history happens

if you want to think about positive change: think about how many more thousands of people today (still not enough) know more about malcolm x than they did when he was alive. we have steadily erased the stigma from his words and beliefs - and that has contributed massively to BLM.

negative change: even when MLK was alive and ever since - americans have steadily whitewashed his words and legacy in an attempt to delegitimatise Black activism.

though the 1960s and since have seen major strides for Black people in this country, that's has happened alongside a consistent and insidious attempt to oppress them - a process that is older and hasn't "disappeared gradually just because MLK marched on Washington"

anyway history doesn't happen in a straight line, and thinking it does doesn't give people hope, it gives them cover to not act in the face of injustice — assuming things just happen naturally — and it gives policy makers cover too. don't do it.