History is not the same everywhere. How else can we explain historical accounts of an event differing from nation to nation? Since the 20th century, several governments have realized that they could rewrite history to their own benefit. And they have been doing just that.

Governments promote these edited versions of history through their schools and textbooks. Their students learn a distorted account of history, which they will often believe into adulthood. Surprisingly, misrepresenting history is not a Third World problem. It cuts across developed and developing economies. However, Asian nations seem to be at the forefront.

10 South Korea

In 2015, the South Korean National Institute of Korean History drew national attention after making controversial edits to the country’s history textbooks. The changes provided overtly positive views about South Korea and promoted negative views about Japan and North Korea. Specifically, they stepped up the criticism of North Korea and condemned its ideology of juche (“self-reliance”).

Conservatives, who suggested the edits, raised concerns that South Korean youths could grow up to admire juche even though North Korea was not self-reliant. North Korea depends on China for major needs, including oil and food. Conservatives also denounced current history textbooks for blaming North and South Korea for the Korean War even though it was North Korea that attacked first.

Conservatives added that current textbooks—which they say are written by liberals—extensively criticized the military regime of Park Chung-hee, who got into power after a coup in 1961. They said that current textbooks downplayed his achievements and beamed their lights on the crimes of his government. Curiously, Park Chung-hee’s daughter, Park Geun-hye, was president when the history textbook edits were proposed.

The conservative South Korean government planned to introduce the textbooks into the country’s schools by March 2017. This would be followed by a ban on every other history textbook in use at the time. The government backtracked on the ban after a series of protests and criticism that the government was trying to brainwash the populace.^[1]

9 Iraq

In 1973, Saddam Hussein had the history textbooks of Iraq rewritten to promote himself and the ideology of his Ba’ath Party. According to the revisions, Hussein had saved the Arab lands from the incursion of the Jews, whom he called greedy people.

Years later, Hussein’s version added that Iraq had won the Iran-Iraq War of 1980–88 and the 1991 Gulf War against the US. Both were false. These textbooks became a source of concern for the US-led coalition that toppled Saddam’s government in 2003.

Working closely with a team of Iraqi educators, the US government removed every reference to Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party. They deleted several references to Iran, Kuwait, Jews, Kurds, Sunnis, Shias, and the US. The educators also edited the details of the 1991 Gulf War to make it “less controversial.”^[2]

8 India And Pakistan

India and Pakistan have had a troubled relationship ever since they gained independence from Britain in 1947. The tense relationship between both regions led to the partitioning of British India into India and Pakistan that year. This was followed by several riots, wars, and the consequent independence of Bangladesh from Pakistan.

These days, either nation is always exploring ways of getting back at the other. They have taken their wars to schools where they have edited their history books to teach a skewed version of past events to their citizens.

History textbooks in both nations provide different reasons for the 1947 partitioning. Pakistani textbooks claim that Pakistani Muslims seceded from India after the Indian Hindus turned them into slaves right after independence. Meanwhile, Indian textbooks claim that the Pakistanis only used the creation of a new country as a bargaining chip and never really wanted one.

India and Pakistan were enmeshed in a series of deadly riots that killed 200,000–500,000 people right after the partitioning. While Pakistani textbooks blame India for the riots by claiming that the Hindus attacked first, Indian textbooks suggest that both sides were guilty.

History textbooks printed in either nation also claim victory in the 1965 war. Pakistani textbooks claim that India “begged for mercy” and “ran to the United Nations” after suffering a series of defeats at the hands of the Pakistani military. Indian textbooks claim that India had almost reached Lahore in Pakistan before the UN ordered the end of hostilities.

On the subsequent partitioning of Bangladesh from Pakistan, Pakistani textbooks accuse India of supporting Bangladesh during the Bangladesh Liberation War that led to the independence of Bangladesh. Indian textbooks accuse Pakistan of attacking the Bangladeshis and claim that India only helped a group of people fighting for freedom.^[3]

7 Japan

Japan has a strained relationship with China and South Korea. Massive anti-Japanese sentiment arose in both nations during the 20th century due to territorial disputes and World War II when Japan invaded and committed war crimes against the citizens of China and Korea.

In 2017, the Japanese government was exposed for editing the history books of junior high school students. The edits were spearheaded by the ironically named “Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact.” The group removed parts of Japanese textbooks containing references to the 300,000 Chinese murdered during the infamous 1937 Nanjing Massacre.

The books deleted references to the 400,000 Korean and Chinese women whom Japan forced into prostitution during World War II. The new textbooks also blamed the US for the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Its authors claimed that the bombings were in response to several trade embargoes that the US placed on Japan, which Japan considered an informal declaration of war.

Critics said the textbook was an attempt to absolve Japan of the extensive war crimes it committed during the 20th century. Curiously, The Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact was already working on a fourth edition at the time of the controversy. This indicates that the Japanese government is slowly removing controversial paragraphs from its history books year after year.

Hiromichi Moteki, the society’s director, disagrees that the Japanese government was editing history. He insists that the new textbooks are accurate, unlike the incorrect accounts promoted in Chinese and Korean textbooks.

Moteki added that Japan actually developed Korea and improved the quality of life of its citizens after invading Korea in 1910. According to him, it was the Koreans who actually exploited the Japanese and not the other way around as everyone believes. He also passed the Nanjing Massacre off as “communist propaganda” and said that the Japanese military never used women as prostitutes.^[4]

6 China

In 1966, Chinese leader Chairman Mao Tse-tung introduced a set of reforms that he called the Cultural Revolution. He claimed that it was part of an attempt to realign China with its communist ideology. However, on the inside, it was also a part of Mao’s ploy to regain his position as the leader of the Chinese Communist Party.

Over the next 10 years, Chairman Mao clamped down on several individuals, leading to a series of protests and other acts of civil disobedience that only ended after his death in 1976. The period is controversial in Chinese history, which prompted the government to remove details about the revolution from its history textbooks in 2018.

An entire chapter about the Cultural Revolution was taken out of the state-approved history textbook and replaced with one about the development of China. The deletions included every reference to the protests and government-backed violence that rocked China at the time. Editing history was easy for the Chinese government because the textbooks are published by the government-owned People’s Education Press.^[5]

5 Taiwan

In 2015, a series of protests erupted in Taiwan after the government attempted to edit high school history textbooks and distort the history of the nation. The edits were considered part of a long-term plan to reunite Taiwan with China.

Taiwan’s plan to edit the accounts of past events began in 2013 when some Taiwanese professors launched a government-approved program to “fine-tune” the island’s history. In February 2014, the professors announced that they had made some corrections to Taiwan’s history and planned to have them introduced to schools by August 2015.

The changes included the renaming of the Taiwanese Zheng dynasty to the Chinese-Taiwanese Ming Zheng dynasty, after the Ming dynasty that ruled mainland China between 1368 and 1644. However, Taiwan was never a part of the Ming dynasty and only became part of China in 1683.

Other corrections saw the professors alter the history of Taiwan after the Republic of China government under the Kuomintang took control of Taiwan in 1949. The revisions were followed by a series of protests by Taiwanese high school students who requested that the government scrap the attempt to edit their textbooks. A professor (who was not involved in the project) claimed that the edits would alter 60 percent of Taiwan’s history.^[6]

4 Afghanistan

In 2012, Afghanistan’s education ministry updated its history curriculum. This led to the instant deletion of 40 years of the nation’s history, including life under the communist government of Afghanistan, several coups in the 1970s, and the 1979 Soviet invasion.

The curriculum also excluded details about the anti-Soviet resistance led by the mujahideen (which later became the Taliban), the deadly civil war fought by the mujahideen factions after the Soviet Union was expelled, and the consequent US invasion and occupation. Any reference to these events was to be completed in a few lines.

The government said the edits were necessary to unify the divided nation where citizens have more allegiance to their tribes, clans, and political beliefs than to the nation itself. Critics say the revisions were an attempt to seek approval from the Taliban and other armed groups in conflict with the government.^[7]

The history curriculum taught in schools at the time depicted these armed groups as bad people. The government could be trying to have them in agreement as US forces leave Afghanistan. One critic likened the deletion of information about the US invasion and occupation to an attempt “to hide the Sun with two fingers.”

3 Turkey

Schools in Germany use Turkish textbooks to teach Turkish students about Turkish history. As of 2013, the government-approved history textbook was Turkce ve Turk Kulturu (“Turkish and Turkish Culture”). However, the book generated so much controversy that people started to call for its ban.

Critics said that Turkce ve Turk Kulturu often altered history to the benefit of Turkey. Like other Turkish history textbooks, it omits or alters several references to the genocide that led to the death of 1.5 million Armenians during and after World War I.

Instead, the authors claimed that the Armenians teamed with the Allies (which included Russia, Britain, and the US) during World War I to destroy the Ottoman Empire, which broke into several nations (including Turkey) after the war. The authors also claimed that Armenia willingly ceded their lands to Turkey after the war, which is false.

Critics also condemned the book over concerns that it aggressively promoted Turkish nationalism. This was because it contained an oath of loyalty to the Turkish state: “It’s my goal to protect the young, honor the aged and love my country and motherland more than myself.”

The book was issued by the Turkish education ministry and distributed by the Turkish embassy.^[8]

2 Chile

In 2012, Chile found itself in a quagmire after its education ministry tried editing parts of its history textbooks relating to the government of General Augusto Pinochet who ruled Chile until 1990. The new books labeled Pinochet’s government a “regime” instead of a “dictatorship.”^[9]

Critics, who were mostly from the left-wing opposition, claimed that the reclassification was an attempt to rewrite history to appease the ruling center-right government, which found favor with the general when he was in power. The government denied the claims, saying it only wanted to use a less politically charged word.

1 Serbia

Slobodan Milosevic was the president of Serbia from 1989 until 1997 when he became the president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia should not be confused with Yugoslavia, which broke into several independent states between 1990 and 1992.

Serbia and Montenegro were parts of the new states. Both nations soon merged to create the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which was not recognized in the West. However, the union hung on until 2003 when it was renamed the Union of Serbia and Montenegro. Three years later, they split into two separate states.

Milosevic is infamous for causing four wars—in Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, and Slovenia—during his reign. He is also accused of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Croatia. However, all that came to an end when his government fell after massive protests in October 2000.

Milosevic edited Serbian history textbooks while in power. He filled them with propaganda and accused other nations of hating Serbia for no reason. Coincidentally, he found himself at the receiving end of a history edit in 2001 when the new Serbian government removed every reference to him from history books.^[10]

The new Serbian history textbooks cleverly avoided mentioning Milosevic’s name even though they recounted several events closely linked to him, including the 1999 Kosovo war, the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia, and the October 2000 protests. For instance, a line from the edited textbooks only mentioned “Massive demonstrations in Belgrade on 5 October 2000” without specifying that Milosevic was the target of the protests.

Radoslav Petkovic, the director of the state publishing house that produced the textbook, later clarified that they had avoided mentioning the names of key government figures in Serbia within the previous 10 years. He added that they had tried to ignore that 10-year period of Serbia’s history.

Of their own accord, sometimes because they have been pressured by government officials or private parties, entertainment media have banned the playing of particular pop songs. Whether at the federal, state, or local level, direct government censorship of such music occurs less often.

However, due to political and other motives, government bans have taken place in China, South Korea, Pakistan, the Congo, South Africa, and the United States. The 10 pop songs on this list were among the victims of such censorship.

Related: 10 Times Musicians Were Banned From Playing In Certain Countries

10 “Fragile”

Although Malaysian rapper Namewee denies bashing China or the Chinese people or supporting Taiwan’s and Hong Kong’s independence, China banished the video featuring his hit song “Fragile” from the country. Officials insist that the artist’s tune is insulting to the nation and its citizens.

Ostensibly, the song’s Mandarin lyrics, sung by Austrian-Chinese vocalist Kimberly Chen, are part of an enchanting romantic ballad about a lover with a heart so fragile it breaks. But, according to an NBC News report, its symbols, idioms, and metaphors are disparaging, blasting “China’s volunteer army of angry digital warriors.”

Known as little pinks, these self-appointed censors form “a core element in China’s cyber nationalism, and…are highly sensitive to any criticism of the country’s leader Xi Jinping.” Those offended by the ballad point to the video’s saturation “with pink objects, decorations and costumes [and to its] dancing panda and stuffed toys in the shape of bats,” which are seen as “tweaking Chinese sensitivities over the origin of the Covid-19 coronavirus.”

Despite the ban and the controversy concerning the hit, “Fragile” has been viewed by millions throughout Hong Kong, Taiwan, Malaysia, and Singapore.^[1]

9 “Beijing Evening News”

China has also banned “Beijing Evening News.” According to Jonathan Kaiman, the song by the underground hip hop group In3 is seen as representing a blistering condemnation of “the capital’s injustice and inequality.” The popular piece contrasts the plight of the poor and disadvantaged with the luxurious lives of the wealthy privileged, the former of whom “sleep in underpasses,” while the latter enjoy fine dining at banquets paid for with “public funds.”

The hit also points out the high price of health insurance, which many of the sick cannot afford. Being banned in China doesn’t seem to have hurt the band too much, though. Members pointed out that “Beijing Evening News” topped the charts.^[2]

8 “Cherry Bomb”

CT 127’s hip hop hit “Cherry Bomb” has been decried by South Korean government officials who banned it as being violent and for encouraging “bad behavior among youth.” But, aside from the “Bomb” in the song’s title, the video version of the tune shows only a group of young men, their clothing changing instantaneously multiple times, as they sing and dance in settings variously resembling a parking garage, a rooftop, a junkyard, a recording studio, an art gallery, and a city street. The only “violent” moment of the performance occurs when a singer seems to punch a pane of glass, causing it to break.

The lyrics are equally innocuous, if somewhat repetitive, mixing Korean with English, a portion of which repeats: “Quickly damage (Korean characters),” followed by “Cherry Bomb yum” (in English). The refrain, also repetitive, is much like a chant: “I’m the biggest hit, I’m the biggest hit on this stage.” In the song’s verses, the group sings about the motorcycles they ride, but from the sound of things, they’re certainly not members of an outlaw motorcycle club: “All we do is party.” Midway through the song, a pre-chorus instructs listeners, “If you’re happy and you know it/ Clap your hands yo (in this beat).” Okay, moving on…

The only illusion to anything that could be construed (with effort) as violent are references to “Cherry Bomb,” which seems to allude to a beverage since it’s sipped from a “cup,” and “a gunshot,” which is ambiguous, as it might refer to anger and violence or could simply allude to the speed at which the youth would take his leave: “Who cares about a hater, hater talk, talk/ I hear what you sayin’ but so what?/ Won’t say it to my face, so I’m off, like a gunshot.”

If anything, the well-groomed appearance of the young men in their stylish clothes and imitative gangsta-style bravado suggest parody more than criminality. Apparently, even a parody of violence and bad behavior is too much for South Korean officials.^[3]

7 “Letter to Ya Tshitshi”

Socrates likened himself to a gadfly; Bob Elvis, a musician operating out of his studio in downtown Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo, compares himself to a mosquito. “I may be small,” he explains, “but I can annoy you all night long by singing, biting, and not leaving you alone.”

His rap song “Letter to Tshitshi” certainly annoyed his country’s president, Félix Tshisekedi, for which reason, it appears, the nation’s Censorship Commission banned it from play days after its release. The song advises the president’s late father, Étienne Tshisekedi, of the nation’s state of affairs under his son’s tenure. The lyrics describe political corruption, electoral fraud, impure water supplies, crime, and civil unrest. As a result, not only has “Letter to Ya Tshitshi” been banned but an additional half-dozen of the rapper’s tunes were also banned. Should a radio station defy the ban, it could incur the government’s wrath in the form of lost licenses.

According to an Economist article, “The legal authority to ban the songs comes from a decree issued by a crooked dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko, 54 years ago.” Even though the song’s lyrics target his son, Félix Tshisekedi would not have agreed to the ban, the article notes: “The current president’s father, were he still alive, would be appalled.” ^[4]

6 “It’s Wrong (Apartheid)”

Musicians from around the world took a stand against South Africa’s apartheid, fulfilling an important part of the protest by serving as “whistleblowers and opponents of the oppressive white government,” notes Sabelo Mkhabela. One of the many such performers was Stevie Wonder, whose “It’s Wrong (Apartheid)” makes the point, as its title indicates, that apartheid is clearly, categorically, and unequivocally wrong.

Poetic justice further brought to light the hypocrisy of the government’s ban on Wonder and other musicians whose songs denounced apartheid. After he was punished by a ban on his music for having dedicated his Oscar to Nelson Mandela, the ban on “We Are the World,” the earnings from which would profit victims of the 1983–1985 African famine, had to be rescinded. The ban was lifted on the song, but it otherwise remained in place on Wonder!^[5]

5 “El Chuchumbé”

As Music Around the World: A Global Encyclopedia notes, the first written records of Mexican folk music, which repose in the Ramo Inquisición, include “El Chuchumbé,” which has the distinction of having been “the first Mexican song to be banned.” The ban resulted from the folk song’s depiction of “soldiers and friars fighting to seduce women.” The song itself finds fault not with the lusty soldiers and friars but with the Veracruz officials who banned “El Chuchumbé” for its “lascivious sones (sounds)and obscene coplas (verses).” Whether one performed the song or observed a performance of it, the penalty was the same for defying the ban: ex-communication, which brought a one-way ticket to hell.

The song’s lyrics are rather bawdy. As Elena Deanda-Camacho, Associate Professor of Spanish at Washington College, explains, “El Chuchumbé,” which usually refers to the navel, alludes instead to the penis in the context of this song. With this meaning in mind, the prurient nature of the opening stanza is clear. In English, it reads: “In the corner he stands / a friar from la Merced / with the lifted habit /showing his chuchumbé.”

Additional lyrics further indicate, without a doubt, the meaning of the word as it is used in the song: “Whether you like it or not/ the ‘chuchumbé’ is going to get you / and if it does not fill you, I will fill you up / with what is dangling from my chuchumbé.” Listeners obviously understood the meaning of the song. As it played, dancers interpreted its lyrics “with gestures [and] shakings,” their conduct constituting “a bad example to those who watched [the dancers]…mixing caresses and…touching belly with belly.”

Church and state were both scandalized by the song’s decadence and its immoral effects, and “Chuchumbé” was banned by the Spanish Inquisition, the government enforcing its prohibition by arresting offenders and turning them over to the Church for investigation and punishment.^[6]

4 “I Don’t Want to Get Well (I’m in Love with a Beautiful Nurse)”

The United States War Department banned “I Don’t Want to Get Well (I’m in Love with a Beautiful Nurse),” apparently because the brass feared its lyrics might persuade soldiers to follow the example of their fictional counterpart.

The front of the record sleeve shows a beautiful Red Cross nurse standing by the side of a recovering soldier’s bed, holding his hand as he looks up at her. Outside the window, as an ambulance passes, one soldier shoots an enemy combatant, suggesting another of the hospital’s beds will be needed shortly.

The song’s lyrics are attributed to a friend of the soldier, who shares the contents of a recent letter he has received from the wounded soldier in answer to one of the sender’s own earlier correspondences. His pal, we learn, “was wounded in the trenches somewhere in France.” Having been asked, in his friend’s earlier letter, whether he was on the mend, the soldier responds with words that echo the song’s title, adding that “the cutest girl” feeds him with a spoon and takes his pulse. And when on the verge of recovery, he relapses. and she “begs [him] not to leave her,” meaning, possibly, she hopes he will not die.^[7]

3 “Ohio”

When the Vietnam War protest on Ohio’s Kent State University resulted in the deaths of four protesters who were shot by National Guard soldiers on May 4, 1970, riots raged across the country. Neil Young responded with his classic hit song “Ohio,” which contains the lyrics “four dead in Ohio,” an obvious reference to the protesters who lost their lives on the campus.

Conservative radio stations refused to air the song protesting the deaths of the protesters. James Rhodes, Ohio’s governor, ordered the state’s stations to ban broadcasts of the Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young single. Despite the ban, however, independent AM stations joined FM stations in playing the banned song, and the “radical tune” landed in fourteenth place on the charts.

Later, “Ohio” was released, with “Find the Cost of Freedom” on the flip side, in a sleeve that listed the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and their guarantee of such freedoms as the right to assemble and the right to engage in free speech.^[8]

2 “Wake Up, Little Susie”

Somehow, even the Everly Brothers found a way to make an innocent date seem risqué. The lyrics have a teenage boy awakening his date, Susie. Although they’ve fallen asleep in a movie theater, the boy appears concerned that the lateness of the hour—it’s four o’clock in the morning—will make Susie’s parents think they have been up to what their friends would call “Ooh-la-la.” They found the movie’s plot so boring that they fell asleep, and now, the boy fears their “reputation is shot.”

The song is “about how innocent acts could be misconstrued as deviant behavior in the stiff 1950s,” a Decades website article observes. A conclusion that seems borne out by the fact that the song was banned at the time by the city of Boston.^[9]

1 The Beatles’ Entire Oeuvre

The Beatles were once banned in the Philippines. Neither their music could be played, nor their records sold. Unlike bans in other countries, this one wasn’t imposed because of politics, concerns about violence or sexual improprieties, institutionalized racial segregation, social injustice, military officers’ worries about the effects that a song might have on soldiers, or even troops’ shootings of protesting citizens. The president of the Philippines took such action because President Ferdinand Marcos believed that the mopheads had “snubbed” his lady love, First Lady Imelda Marcos.

The band’s offense? A prior engagement had precluded their acceptance of her invitation for them to join her for lunch. Government-owned newspapers throughout the islands criticized the allegedly rude musicians’ boorish behavior. Two concerts during the same day, before 100,000 Filipino fans, led to crowds’ shouts and threats as the famous foursome took off from Manila’s airport. Although the ban was lifted not long after it went into effect, the Beatles’ music never stopped being played in Filipino bars.^[10]