What does Radical History Review have to say about truth commissions? The journal gives them mixed reviews in this special issue, Truth Commissions: State Terror, History, and Memory . According to the authors of the three full-length articles which make up the volume, truth commissions’ treatment of past violence may sometimes hew too closely to depoliticized narratives of individual victims and perpetrators – foregoing deeper accounts of structural violence. Or, their accounts may privilege investigations and perpetrators’ testimony over the subjective accounts of violence victims offer. In either case, this special issue is well worth reading for its insights into the challenging relationship between the writing of history, radical or not, and the writing of ‘truth.’ Two of the articles look specifically at truth commission reports, analyzing both the production of ‘truth’ about the past, and how that ‘truth’ is packaged and disseminated. Elizabeth Oglesby, in her excellent examination of the reception of the Guatemalan Historical Clarification Commission report, ‘Educating Citizens in Postwar Guatemala: Historical Memory, Genocide, and the Culture of Peace,’ argues that the report's complex picture of agency and strife in Guatemalan history has been reduced to a depoliticized ‘culture of peace’ narrative that fits with the interests of international agencies and donors. She investigates a particular vector of the report's transmission, history education at the primary and secondary level in Guatemala, using interviews and an assessment of a broad range of materials, including textbooks, websites and curricula.