Online circle
How to read a contested history
A circle about method rather than about any one place: how to tell an observation from an inference from an interpretation from a political claim, using cases where getting it wrong has had real consequences — Great Zimbabwe, Hagia Sophia, the Treaty of Waitangi, terra nullius.
This circle has no host yet.
Everything below — the expectations, the guide, the prompts, the session plan — is a prepared draft. There are no sessions scheduled and no conversation yet, and this page will not pretend otherwise. If you take it on, you decide when it runs and what it covers.
Sign in to see who is in this circle, join it, or take on hosting. Reading the plan needs no account.
What taking part asks of you
- Come to understand a disagreement, not to win it.
- Say which kind of claim you are making: observed, inferred, interpreted, or held as a value.
- Cite where you can. 'I read somewhere' is fine as long as you say that is what it is.
- Nobody here speaks for a whole community, including when they belong to one.
- Personal attacks, and dismissing a person's connection to a history, end participation.
Host guide draft
Written by Globe Quest editorial on 2026-09-07, not by anyone who has run this circle. Change it freely once you have.
- Start with the four-way distinction and keep returning to it. It is the entire point, and it is what makes this circle safe to run at all.
- Take a case that is NOT live in anybody's current politics for the first session. Great Zimbabwe works well.
- Do not chair a debate. Ask what evidence would change someone's mind, and let that do the work.
- Be explicit that some things are settled — who built Great Zimbabwe is not an open question — and that treating settled matters as open is its own distortion.
- You will need to end a session early sometimes. Say so at the start so that doing it is not a surprise.
- Read the moderation guidance before hosting. You are expected to use it.
Session plan draft
About 60 minutes. Suggested: An hour, needs a host who has read the moderation guidance.
1. The four kinds of claim15 min
Observation, inference, interpretation, political claim — with examples.
2. A case, at distance20 min
Work one case where nobody present has skin in the game.
3. A case closer to home15 min
Now try one that does touch someone in the room. Slower.
4. What would change your mind?10 min
Each person answers for their own position.