Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Correcting distorted history taught in schools

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    In almost all things there is good and evil. If we chose to teach our children only one side of the story how can we expect them learn from history, or to take sound action based on what they have learned. Some people I know like to turn a blind eye to their ancestor who deserted George Washington's Army after 2 days of service in favor of fighting for King George. On that information it is despicable. However when you add to the story that his brother begged him to stand with the rest of the family and his Mother in support of the King it becomes clearer. He loved his Family above his own freedom. From a family perspective there is a powerful example here, from a strategic perspective we see a powerful lesson on the other side of the scale. Some may disagree with me but IMO if there was ever anything worth sacrificing pride and freedom for ones own family would be it. However it cost this man almost everything. After the war he had to flee the country for his life.
    Our education system was bias when I was a child and is so now. Just now they have chosen different causes to blindly fallow. If we continue to rob our children of the whole story they will be more prone to be obtuse or abusive when they obtain positions of power. Abusive / obtuse leaders are week leaders and prone to failure.

    Comment


    • #17
      Grim, that man who fought for King George was not alone. Not even close. There were a large number of colonials who were not in favor of independence, and considered themselves loyal British subjects of the crown. Many attempted to stay neutral, which didn't work well, and those who fought for the British, of course, lost everything.

      If the British had won, Washington, Jefferson, Adams, dozens of men we revere as the founders of our nation, would have been hung as traitors. We would now be similar to Canada or Australia in the sense that independence would have come eventually, but we would have remained within the Empire for many, many decades, probably into the 1900's.

      It's interesting to ponder the ramifications if the American Revolution had failed. Slavery would have been ended early (or it would have fomented a second revolution, the South vs. the British in the early 1800's); WW1 would have seen the "Colonial Regiments" fighting for the British from 1914 onward... all sorts of oddities.

      Comment


      • #18
        Chogy, You are right Sir. It's my opinion that we could use those situations even those we are embarrassed by to teach. I went through school I was never taught that sometimes there are no right / easy answers. Of course I joined the Core at 17 so I think I would have learned this in collage had it not have been for Uncle Sam. But I believe such knowledge should be taught to children at an earlier age then 18. It might help to temper them for the realities of life. As it is we have so many collage age unrealistic idealist running around now it is really a problem for the nation as a whole. As it is, it makes us weaker as a nation and it makes our children weaker as people. To many people want to further their narrow agendas by only teaching their side of chosen stories. This is only a sign of of their lack of trust that our children will be able to from sound opinions if they are shown the whole truth.

        Comment


        • #19
          There are so many different views.
          I hate school, but come on they should only teach some basic facts. If people want to find out about different views they can start reading Paul Johnson or Gore Vidal .

          I think there are things that are clearly positive.

          The first poster mentioned the current wars.
          Are they part of the curricullum?

          Comment


          • #20
            There is just not enough time to teach history in schools, heck i took American history B in before i took American history A due to a screw up with the counselors.
            "oh smeg"- Dave Lister

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Chogy View Post
              It is not just American schools that are guilty...
              German history lessons are generally pretty accurate - they just tend to gloss over things, especially for the time pre-WW1. Generalizations and such.

              Hmm, let's see... the 1848 revolution was completely democratic and peaceful. Bismarck was Germany's saviour or something suddenly appearing from nowhere in 1871 (... even if he had already been Prussian Prime Minister for 10 years) and founding the empire, and his government was completely democratic. Woodrow Wilson represented all countries fighting against Germany post-WW1. The Free Corps post-WW1 in Germany were some kind of government-sponsored units created solely to fight the evil communists. Absolutely nothing happened outside of Germany between 1918 and 1936. FDR toed the line to national-socialism in the 30s, and Truman didn't exist during WW2 (ah well, two weeks... not enough for the books?). The Dresden bombing was a solitary event (worldwide), and hence an atrocity. 90% of all Germans were only forced to play along with the Nazis, since that's what the postwar de-nazification "shows". All Germans east of Germany were sent to Gulags. The occupation of Germany by the Western Allies ended in 1949, the part not belonging to West Germany was the "Soviet-Occupied Zone" until 1990. West Germany liberated the East.

              Erm... and regarding the USA: "sometime in the 1770s" there was a more or less peaceful rebellion in 13 colonies over in America. The colonies bought up the rest of North America except Canada over the next 100 years or so. In the 1860s they had a civil war leading to abolition of slavery. In 1917 the USA decided to get involved with the rest of the world. That's about it in German school history books, unless one takes advanced classes.

              Comment


              • #22
                I'd like to see the Cuban missile crisis properly taught. In reality it went something like this:

                Sovs: Wtf are those missiles doing in Turkey?

                JFK: Huh? Do you mean us?

                Sovs: Yeah, you! Get the things out

                JFK: What if we don't?

                Sovs: Well, we'll put a few of our own in Cuba, that's what

                JFK: You wouldn't dare!

                Sovs: Watch us!

                JFK: Yikes, they really did!

                Sovs: Told you so!

                JFK: Ok, we'll pull out our missiles if you pull out yours

                Sovs: Ok

                JFK: But you have to keep quiet about our missiles, otherwise I look like a wimp. We'll give you a sweet deal on something else

                Sovs: Hehehe! Just what we wanted :-)
                Last edited by Karhu; 06 Sep 09,, 12:31.

                Comment


                • #23
                  enough time.....

                  Originally posted by spamslayer View Post
                  There is just not enough time to teach history in schools, heck i took American history B in before i took American history A due to a screw up with the counselors.
                  I'm not an educator. I know that over 15 years ago in public high school, both of my children were able to take good college "AP" preparatory courses, such that they could "clep" out of 1st semester calculus, physics, chemistry, and English at a reputable private university. But no such courses were offered for history.

                  I have a friend in his mid-80's, who won't last much longer. He served with my unit, but a war ahead of me in the Korean War. He remains distressed that most young ones here in the U.S.A. that he meets today have no idea what his war was about. Many don't recognize the name of the war, or know where on a globe Korea is located. He was at the Punchbowl, and Heartbreak Ridge, names most of my generation readily recognizes. The Korean War's reputation as "the forgotten war" seems to be appropriate.

                  However on the positive side, my friend was recently presented a medal by the Korean counselate from Houston. This Korean told my friend that his country has NOT forgotten the sacrifice these Marines made nearly 60 years ago. I'm glad that my friend experienced this before he departs.

                  It is a shame to see a nation that excelled after WWII, largely due to the G.I. Bill and the education of the population, decline in this manner. I fear that the trend won't be reversed, and that we will sink into the ranks of lesser nations that are subject to the ambitions of the most powerful.
                  Nightcover 1-4 Bravo
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Perhaps the decline in history is not as great as you might fear. The average American might not be able to find Korea on a map, but probably can tell you who Rosa Parks was or tell you about some other historical event or person. The field of history has exploded over the last half century with so many new avenues and areas of study. Before history was mostly the study of war: ancient, medieval or modern. Today history is the study of humanity from the neolithic to yesterday.

                    Cable channels like the History Channel, Military Channel, Discovery Channel et. al, do not survive because Americans have no desire to learn. They survive by feeding a hunger that is almost limitless. Yes what TV peddles is often tripe and horribly wrong on important facts, but the fact they attract advertisers means they attract viewers.

                    Out of this great multitude of people interested in history comes the future historians. It used to be a love for history had to be self ignited like myself after reading books like "The Guns of August", or inspired by a mentor. Mass media means millions more have access to history in an entertaining format that might start a fire for learning.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      zraver

                      Hope you're correct in that assessment, Sir. I agree that the study of humanity is essential, especially in order for us to recognize just how much we have advanced, how far we have to go, and what we might do to improve our society.

                      Still, the great wars are what enable the progress of humanity, or prevent it. In order for us to continue to progress, we must study the past in the context of geography to better understand when an emerging aggressor with bad intentions towards us may actually pose a real threat, and how best to respond.

                      My wish is that someday our political systems will evolve such that our politicians will act in the interest of humanity and not in self-interest. But perhaps the very nature of politics and the people it attracts preclude that, except for the uncommon individuals who stand out in history. It's beyond my ability to comprehend.

                      The past few decades have not improved my outlook so far as our progress. Perhaps it's an instance of "three steps forward and two steps back" and we're about to move forward again.
                      Nightcover 1-4 Bravo
                      sigpic

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X