What Was Left Unsaid by Alisa

What Was Left Unsaid by Alisa - July 2026 Scholarship Essay

My first college U.S. history course challenged something I had rarely questioned before: that the history I had learned was complete. Every history class I'd taken up until then presented the story of America's creation as the story of its victory in a war for independence. Though we learn about various systems of oppression, such as chattel slavery and seizing of indigenous lands, we still viewed these groups in relation to European colonization, and overlooked their features as independent societies with their own systems of agriculture, political governance, and complex alliances. Rather than centering the familiar narrative of European colonization, my professor emphasized Indigenous societies as complex civilizations with their own political systems, agricultural innovations, and diplomatic alliances. We also examined the ways enslaved Africans and Indigenous communities resisted oppression together, perspectives I had rarely encountered in previous history courses.

In the beginning of the semester, my professor explained our final assignment as a four-page essay covering a topic relevant to American history. Early on, inspired by a Political Theory class of mine, I decided to write my paper on John Locke's philosophical influence on the American Revolution. I wanted to examine how his ideas of intrinsic natural rights, as outlined in his Two Treatises of Government, shaped ideological thinking in the colonies in ways that justified revolting against Britain, with text excerpts from the U.S. Declaration of Independence and John Locke's own writing. When I proposed my thesis to my professor, he criticized its strong concentration on the colonist's perspective, and encouraged me to consider commonly overlooked perspectives. At first, I resisted the criticism. I believed my paper simply explored an influential philosopher, not a biased perspective. Ultimately, my research revealed that Locke's philosophy was applied selectively in the colonies, and the harm those contradictions caused. Though I knew the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness excluded enslaved and Indigenous people, I hadn't known of the self-contradictions within Locke's own writings, nor of how his philosophy's application actually worsened conditions for America's Indigenous people. Locke was closely connected to colonial slavery through his investments, and drafted the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, which included provisions formally legalizing hereditary slavery. Furthermore, his definition of land ownership and property being constituted by any land which is transformed by one's labor was used by colonists to justify intruding upon Indigenous people's lands. Because many Indigenous nations understood land ownership through communal rather than private systems, colonists essentially viewed it as unused and available for seizure through Locke's definition of property.

My research process forced me to confront the unstated premises in the way history is often taught. Locke's writings are often portrayed primarily through their notion of natural rights, with little attention given to the contradictions within those writings and their application in colonial America. I had to actively seek counter-perspectives and combine different pieces of information to form a new understanding. By questioning widely accepted interpretations of Locke's influence on America, I uncovered contradictions I never previously considered. That experience changed how I approach every subject I study. I no longer assume that the most familiar explanation is the complete one. Instead, I ask what voices are missing, what assumptions remain unexamined, and how different perspectives reshape the story. I learned that critical thinking is not simply identifying misinformation, but also recognizing that the absence of certain perspectives can be just as misleading as false information.