Historical Changes

[Guest Adara]

This morning while checking up on news...(I do that every so often to ground myself... ) I found this article that I thought was interesting.

I honestly agree with the article, what do you all think?

Minorities seek history class changes

[Guest Adara]

But at least those minorities would be incorporated. I know history books even now have discrepencies, but they are still there, and they still tell a story. I would like to have America's history incorporate the history of ALL Americans, not just white Americans and very little mentioning of minorities.

Beside, putting different histories from different countries makes the picture whole. If our history is not but just the majority's view, does that really give us an identity as a country?

America is a union of peoples, our history books should exhibit that.

[Guest Adara]

Well, I think it would be cleaned up to begin with. You're not going to go teaching six graders about rape and pillaging and how that shaped our country. Mostly because schools are meant to teach the general fact and not go into the grizzly details.

Now, UNIVERSITY level history books, are not so censoring. These books do not leave out the sordid parts of our history. They also envoke discussion about the accuracy of the text.

BUT if it isn't in a text, we can't very well discuss it. So I feel it should be in there, so that we can truly analyze our past.

[Guest Melody Fate]

As long as it's fairly truthful, I'm for it. And that means on all sides.

I agree with nikolatesla1 that I'm tired of the PC attitude of "Whites are all that ever was and ever will be evil in this world. Anyone who's skin is not white is a suffering minority and never did anything wrong to anyone in their life."

I'm sort-of surprised by this, because I thought it had already been happening. My friend's kids know more about historical figures like Crispus Atticks, George Washington Carver, and Martin Luthar King than they know about Lincoln and JF Kennedy. They can (or at least could at some point) quote you by memory, most of the "I Have a Dream" speech, but could not tell you the preamble to the Constitution. And they knew almost nothing about Betsy Ross, or pretty much any female historical figures, which really annoyed me, because if people are playing the game of "Which group of people were held down the longest" I'll point out that black males had the right to vote before any females, white included, did.

I fully support that each group gets their turn in the sun, but not at the expense of another group. I believe all nationalities should know their history, both the good and the bad. Yes, I understand we have to give a more sanitized version of history to younger kids, but ironically, when I was in school, white guilt was just starting and our teachers had no problems telling us how all us horrible whites ruthlessly murdered and enslaved black people and gave us the impression that slavery had never been heard of until then and making us feel rather like one day all whites woke up with a burr across their asses and said, "I want someone with dark skin to do all my work for me, while I laze around the old plantation, drinking mint julleps, only rising to whip the bastards that step out of line!" We were left with the impression that all white people naturally had a hateful streak in them and that we had to stamp that out of ourselves ASAP. Blacks and anyone who didn't have white skin, somehow, never had this problem and that's why we were able to take advantage of them, because they were gentle innocent people who didn't have a mean bone in their bodies. Oh, and also, they were a whole lot smarter than us too. How were we able to take advantage of them, since they were brilliant and we were brutes? The impression was that we just brutalized them into submission. They had no defenses, because they'd never had to fight in their lives.

No, I did not go to a racially mixed school. In fact, there were no black students in my elementary and Junior High. It was like the United States was trying to absolve itself of their sins, and doing it by slamming into their white children that they were somehow born with the mark of Cain upon them and would carry it about forever.

I'm also in favor of not having separate history class, as some schools are doing, where the Asians are taught everything Asian, the Latinos are taught everything Latino, so on and so forth. Yes, in High School if you want to have specialized classes that's fine, but until then, all kids should be taught the same history and it should be taught as honestly as possible. If I were a parent and my kid came home spouting some of the crap I'd been taught, I'd start homeschooling the kid and teaching them the truth. And the basic truth is that there isn't a race under the sun that doesn't have a history filled with bloodshed and cruelty. We didn't get to the top of the food chain by picking flowers and dancing in the moonlight. We did it by tooth and claw. Our ability to have morals and to figure out what is right and wrong is a luxury allowed us only because we became so good at getting food and shelter that we had more time to think. The best we can teach our children is that the past is full of bad mistakes, learn from them, and hopefully your generation will avoid them.

[Guest Adara]

But I don't think those who want our history to include minorities wants said minorities to be a topic all on themselves. They want to include everyone in our text books, and I'm all for the bad as well. I never thought it was a "all white people are of the devil" (I love the Water Boy. ) issue.

I have never on a personal level been racist to. I've seen hispanic people be just as racist as I've heard of white and black. I just want EVERYONE who contributed in making America what it is, (good or bad) to be included in it. Not to be taught solely that history, but together as a whole.

I think why so many hispanic kids or black kids know so much about minority leaders is because classrooms aren't going to teach us about them as a rule. Our parents know that. So in order to compensate for that, they teach us about them. If minority leaders were held in high regard in history books along with lets say Lincoln and Kennedy, I doubt kids would not retain it.

[foeofthelance]

I say leave the history books alone. As far as I've ever been able to tell, the meaning of studying history is not to determine who was where when, but WHY.

The country wasn't settled because the settlers were white, it was settled because everyone wanted to get rich quick, save for some of the english settlers, who were ticked off at being persecuted for their religious beliefs. In the process, they shoved most of the native tribes off to the side as being "savages".

The Revolutionary War occured because Britain wanted reimbursement for a war we made them fight, and we wanted some say in how we had to pay. Neither side really listened, so a war broke out. Pretty much the same for the War of 1812.

The Civil War was started because one side wanted to keep living in the past, one side wanted to embrace the future,and neither side bothered to ask the group they were fighting over, they simply assumed they were right.

The Indian Wars took place because after a hundred plus years of living, people found they didn't have enough land, so they went and took it from those they could.

World War I started because people are idiots.

World War II started because people didn't remove the idiots who started World War I from power, and allowed said idiots to blame an innocent party for their pown actions.

Vietnam and Korea were simply the results of the end of World War II.

The modern War on Terrorism was the result of the Cold War, which was in turn the fault of the same causes of Vietnam and Korea.

So whose fault is all this?

Well, 100,000 years ago, man was born in Africa. Let's blame the blacks.

Except, 10,000 years ago there was a major extinction event, and the survivors were all holed up in Australia. So let's blame those from the south Pacific.

But, you know, 7,000 years ago the Egyptians created this little thing called "civilization", so I guess we're back to Africa. Ok, so it really is the black's fault. Well, except it could have started in the middle east somewhere, so let's blame the Arabs. Or, as some of us Republicans would like to say, and as Democrats like to believe we all like to say, (Hey, fair's fair.) "Let's Blame the Terrorists!"

Except, well, about 5,000-6,000 years ago, Greeks decided they could do it better. Even worse, they deided to create a written language instead of pictographs, so I guess it's all the Greek's fault.

But they fell apart and the Romans took over, so now it's alll the Italian's fault. On a different note, they're also responsible for the birth of England as a nation, so this make's several other thing's their fault.

Marco Polo was also Italian, but golly gee, if those blasted Asians hadn't been such bastards and started their own civilization, there would have been no need for trade routes and such. So in the end, it's their fault.

Except Columbus was Italian, and had Spanish backing, so I say we blame the Spanish and Italians. Bloody Spanish and Italians!

Except they wouldn't have had any reason to explore the new world if the locals hadn't gone around digging up all that gold. So now it's all the Latino's fault.

The problems after that can all be blamed on the French, and since this covers most of the late 1600s to early 1800s, I'm not going to go into any detail. So let's bash the French!

So, all in all, we could say it's all the white man's fault. But that's not giving the black's the credit they're due. And of course, then we have to deal with the Asians and all the other various subcultures of the Islands, North, and Sotuh American continents. Hmmm. How to sum this up then?

I know. Let's blame humanity. There, everyone happy?

[Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi]

I say leave the history books alone. As far as I've ever been able to tell, the meaning of studying history is not to determine who was where when, but WHY.

The country wasn't settled because the settlers were white, it was settled because everyone wanted to get rich quick, save for some of the english settlers, who were ticked off at being persecuted for their religious beliefs. In the process, they shoved most of the native tribes off to the side as being "savages".

The Revolutionary War occured because Britain wanted reimbursement for a war we made them fight, and we wanted some say in how we had to pay. Neither side really listened, so a war broke out. Pretty much the same for the War of 1812.

The Civil War was started because one side wanted to keep living in the past, one side wanted to embrace the future,and neither side bothered to ask the group they were fighting over, they simply assumed they were right.

The Indian Wars took place because after a hundred plus years of living, people found they didn't have enough land, so they went and took it from those they could.

World War I started because people are idiots.

World War II started because people didn't remove the idiots who started World War I from power, and allowed said idiots to blame an innocent party for their pown actions.

Vietnam and Korea were simply the results of the end of World War II.

The modern War on Terrorism was the result of the Cold War, which was in turn the fault of the same causes of Vietnam and Korea.

So whose fault is all this?

Well, 100,000 years ago, man was born in Africa. Let's blame the blacks.

Except, 10,000 years ago there was a major extinction event, and the survivors were all holed up in Australia. So let's blame those from the south Pacific.

But, you know, 7,000 years ago the Egyptians created this little thing called "civilization", so I guess we're back to Africa. Ok, so it really is the black's fault. Well, except it could have started in the middle east somewhere, so let's blame the Arabs. Or, as some of us Republicans would like to say, and as Democrats like to believe we all like to say, (Hey, fair's fair.) "Let's Blame the Terrorists!"

Except, well, about 5,000-6,000 years ago, Greeks decided they could do it better. Even worse, they deided to create a written language instead of pictographs, so I guess it's all the Greek's fault.

But they fell apart and the Romans took over, so now it's alll the Italian's fault. On a different note, they're also responsible for the birth of England as a nation, so this make's several other thing's their fault.

Marco Polo was also Italian, but golly gee, if those blasted Asians hadn't been such bastards and started their own civilization, there would have been no need for trade routes and such. So in the end, it's their fault.

Except Columbus was Italian, and had Spanish backing, so I say we blame the Spanish and Italians. Bloody Spanish and Italians!

Except they wouldn't have had any reason to explore the new world if the locals hadn't gone around digging up all that gold. So now it's all the Latino's fault.

The problems after that can all be blamed on the French, and since this covers most of the late 1600s to early 1800s, I'm not going to go into any detail. So let's bash the French!

So, all in all, we could say it's all the white man's fault. But that's not giving the black's the credit they're due. And of course, then we have to deal with the Asians and all the other various subcultures of the Islands, North, and Sotuh American continents. Hmmm. How to sum this up then?

I know. Let's blame humanity. There, everyone happy?

No.

^__^

[Guest Adara]

Except Columbus was Italian, and had Spanish backing, so I say we blame the Spanish and Italians. Bloody Spanish and Italians!

So, all in all, we could say it's all the white man's fault. But that's not giving the black's the credit they're due. And of course, then we have to deal with the Asians and all the other various subcultures of the Islands, North, and Sotuh American continents. Hmmm. How to sum this up then?

I know. Let's blame humanity. There, everyone happy?

Actually Columbus was Portuguese, Cristopholo Colombo as a matter of fact

And well, I didn't remember history being about blaming others. The whole topic is about INCLUDING everyone in US History.

[Guest Melody Fate]

But I don't think those who want our history to include minorities wants said minorities to be a topic all on themselves.  They want to include everyone in our text books, and I'm all for the bad as well.  I never thought it was a "all white people are of the devil" (I love the Water Boy. ) issue. 

To be honest? I think my generation got the worst of the "You scummy white person!" and I believe most of it came from whites.

My parents grew up in the ages of "separate but equal" And, while they might have wondered, it was so ingrained into them that this was the way it was, that they didn't question as much as they should.

My generation, their children, cannot fathom that there was a time in history when a black woman would have to give up her seat for a white person. It just boggles our mind that the world could be that screwed up. That a black person couldn't sit in a restaurant and eat a meal that they paid for? You might as well tell me that dinosaurs roamed up and down the battlefields of the civil war, that was just as believable.

But, where did I learn these values so different? From my parents, who as children accepted, but as adults, started to see the error of their ways. So, in turn, their generation tried to pound it into our heads out of some misplaced form of penance for their sins. "Well, we might have been jerks for how we acted, but our kids will make up for that!"

My mother, growing up, would have shocked the whole town if she'd had a black friend. Her parents probably would have hesitated to allow her in the yard.

I had slumber parties where it didn't matter what color you were, as long as you had a sleeping bag or some blankets and liked to tell ghost stories and do quizzes in teen magazines. Yet, when I was dating, if I dated anyone black, my parents would have had a fit.

My friend's kids have both dated and married black people and while their grandparents are shocked, their parents, my contemporaries, are able to shrug and say, "Well, what matters is that they love each other." I figure when those kids children are adults and start bringing home their boyfriends and future husbands, they won't even notice if they aren't the same color, or place as much concern on the issue as they would hair or eye color.

[Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi]

Actually Columbus was Portuguese, Cristopholo Colombo as a matter of fact

And well, I didn't remember history being about blaming others. The whole topic is about INCLUDING everyone in US History.

Really, a lot of history IS about who did what to who. A lot of it is "Blah blah blah The whites killed everyone, threw everyone off their land and are EVIL! Well, except for the Alamo thing, but nobody like Mexicans anyway."

Here's a good example, when in my Junior year my US history teacher gave us 2 or three differant history book passages (all currant) on the Boston Massacare. All articles were from differant places. The one from England stated that the British soldiers were being harrassed by the Bostonions while the American one said they just started shooting because of the houting, but that the Americans were doing nothing physical.

Which do you believe? Who was attacking who?

History books in almost ever country are very onesided, usually to show how THEY were wronged or something of that manner.

Textbooks in China show that the Tiennaman Square incident A) Resulted in FAR fewer casualties then we here are taugh and that It was brought on by violent actions on the part of the protesters. And, hey, what's to say they aren't telling the truth? We hav athing for demonizing all government systems we don't like. Communism is high on the eradication list (even though, we're now alied with China... hmm...).

Back during the whole segragation thing, when Blacks were public enemy No. 1, it was A-Ok to make movies and such about how horrible black people are and Blah Blah Blah. History books, if blacks were mentioned, showed them in the WORST LIGHT POSSIBLE! NOW, all our history books praise them up to the high heaven and blame whites for their persecution and for the inability to get ahead today.

So, yeah, it IS about who's blaming who. Given, there is the WHY but still, it's gonna be pretty biased no matter what.

[Guest Adara]

History isn't suppose to be, I didn't mean to say that it never happened. History is suppose to be factual. Regardless of what we made it to be.

[foeofthelance]

The problem is that much of history will never be factual, simply because most of the people who made it died during the process of said making.

[StoryJunkie]

ooh, ooh, me, me now! (raises hand and waves it around a lot)

I think the article was a filler because there was nothing else to report, but as we all know, "No news is good news".

We can't possibly stuff all the known historical facts into children's heads or our own. We'll forget how to live in the "now". However, I think that its a kind of growing thing, where you learn more and more history as you get older and you shouldn't stop learning or questioning. One of the criteria for inclusion in the history books is the combination of several agreeable accounts for every important incident. For instance, the ride of Paul Revere, or the Battle of Waterloo. Of course, one would say the good guys write the history, but then, would you think we lived in a wrong world if Hitler would have won? Obviously, although he had some really good ideas, and very popular policies, there was something deeply wrong with the man.

And Attilla the Hun? In Hungary "Attila" is an honoured name. He was a great conqueror.

I'm glad someone brought up the African origins, however, just because we found one skeleton (or was it only a skull?) doesn't mean that there weren't others somewhere else. That's just where we happen to find that one. Who knows what the Earth will reveal when the next upheaval occurs? (Although it does seem more likely that Africa is the land of Eden, since the climate was conducive to human development) We won't really know the truth until we die and go to heaven and have that really really long talk with God about all this. That is, if you believe in God.

[Iggy_lovechild]

I don't know about everyone else but all those things that the article was citing as "little known" historical facts about America...Yeah, I knew that shit. Now mind you, while I'd been in school, I'd never paid much attention to American history. I'd found it boring, not nearly as interesting as the stuff that went down in Europe. Still do somewhat feel that way, but I'm starting to get over it.

Anyway, what I'm suriously wondering is if it's just the education in this day in age. I know sex ed has become laughable, perhaps history and everything else is not so far behind?

[Guest Nympho]

I've often wondered about how British history books described the American Revolution. Do they call it the Rebellion?

I think most countries tend to downplay they're own fuck-up and focus on others unless they feel there's some big lesson to be learned, going by popular opinion of course. I found an old history textbook from the nineteen forties under my grade school's auditorium once. It made free use of the word "nigger", but if any history book tried to use that term now the publishers would get their asses fried. In the forties it wasn't that big of a deal, but popular opinion changed and the history books with it.

Please note I was using this as an example, I personally hate the word "nigger".

[Guest chibi4president]

We won't really know the truth until we die and go to heaven and have that really really long talk with God about all this. That is, if you believe in God.

I'm really looking forward to that.

"Y'know, God, I was wondering..."

I don't think that the history I learned in high school was inclusive enough. I took what I like to call "fake world history" in 10th grade, mainly because our teacher skipped most of the chapters on Africa, Asia, and South America and we only got North American and European history. And when I kindly mentioned this, he receded into "I'm one of those teachers that DOESN'T like kids who know too much" mode and told me to go back to my seat.

And he's the reason I'm completely lost in my required college course of African Civilization.

*shakes head at Arkansas' bad public education system*

Yeah, I'm bitter. I'm paying for this.

I'm glad that now that I'm OUT of public school, textbooks are attempting to include every group in history. I'll put it this way. I once had a white classmate ask me, "You know, there's Black History Month...so why isn't there a White History Month?'

"There is," I told her. "There's a lot of them. They're the other 11 months of the year."

All in all, I think the reason why US history is so difficult is because we have so many differently diverse groups that suffered and fought to make our country what it is and deserve to be included in its history.

[dazzledfirestar]

Okay, well, this is an outsider's opinion on this, so if some of my facts about the American school system are wrong, forgive me.

I am (obviously) not American, but from what I'm hearing here, I probably have a more diverse persepective on your history than you do. There's a funny little joke we like to say up here in Canada; Canadians know more about America than Americans know about... anything. I always thought that was a bit of an exageration... but now I'm starting to wonder.

Perhaps it's not the diversity of your own history that is the problem. Perhaps it's the lack of any other histories. In the Canadian system we learned it all (at least when I was there) African, European, Asian, Canadian and American. I can name your presidents, can you name any Prime Ministers of Canada?

Perhaps if your history classes (and pardon me for saying it your government) were a bit less focused on "Rah Rah America!" it would be easier to see the diversity in your own (and everyone else's) history without it being a huge deal.

[Guest Evil_Labs]

The teacher actually said he didn't like the kids to know too much? ...Wow. Why the hell is he a teacher, then? Then again, I remember going through Atlanta on a road trip and seeing a billboard saying that knowledge was evil and against god.

[Guest Adara]

Canadians know more about America, for the most part, as an American living in Canada, I say that's pretty far fetched. More Canadians know about the US simply because it seems everyone up here is just looking for reasons NOT to like the country. I've had several Canadian teenagers go and scream how the US is in Iraq for the oil, even though we get our oil from Kuwait. I'm talking open hostility.

I've gotten more insults about my nationality in Canada, than I have in Mexico, and let me tell you, not ALL Mexican's like the U.S. Most Canadians "Hate" the U.S. because of issues the MEDIA covers. Most Canadians claim that Americans are idiots that know nothing and have a hearty chuckle at our expense. Many have gone as far as to insult me, without even knowing it.

Everyone up here always brings up the War of 1812 and wave that victory around like it's nobody's business. Whether we know about your Prime Ministers was not important to the school system, not to ourselves. Canadians are just as out of touch with their heritage and the world around them, as Americans. Most of Canadian Government doesn't take care of their people half as well as they should. People have to struggle to get jobs, to get anything. Other than healthcare.

My husband is one such person. He was in the Military, was involved in an issue in one of his peacekeeping tours, got majorly injured, and yet, the government gave him nothing, other than a check every month from Disability. That doesn't cover HALF of our bills. I've seen more Canadians complain about the short end of the stick they get from the government, than they complain about America. Then of course there was that major sponsorship scandal. Knowing more about History is great. I am all for it, but so is learning about your system.

I've seen more Canadian 12-19 year olds smoking, getting pregnant, drinking, and doing drugs. Does that mean that the US is better educated in the hazards of such habits? No. It just means that we all have different issues.

We Americans do need to do a major overhaul on our school system, mainly our history, as it is unbelievable that many don't know the three branches of our government to begin with. Canadians need to do a major overhaul on what they base their opinions on, and on their attitude. That's how I view things.

[Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi]

Okay, well, this is an outsider's opinion on this, so if some of my facts about the American school system are wrong, forgive me.

I am (obviously) not American, but from what I'm hearing here, I probably have a more diverse persepective on your history than you do. There's a funny little joke we like to say up here in Canada; Canadians know more about America than Americans know about... anything. I always thought that was a bit of an exageration... but now I'm starting to wonder.

Perhaps it's not the diversity of your own history that is the problem. Perhaps it's the lack of any other histories. In the Canadian system we learned it all (at least when I was there) African, European, Asian, Canadian and American. I can name your presidents, can you name any Prime Ministers of Canada?

Perhaps if your history classes (and pardon me for saying it your government) were a bit less focused on "Rah Rah America!" it would be easier to see the diversity in your own (and everyone else's) history without it being a huge deal.

It's AMERICA! Americans are the kind of douche-bags who go to other contries and expect everyone to speak English.

It's really bad in New York where there are so many immagrants who don't know a lick of English but expect to be successful here (and, really, a lot are because the government caters to them). So, you have everyone who was born here who's parents speak fluent english all bitchy about people who can't.

[dazzledfirestar]

Everyone up here always brings up the War of 1812 and wave that victory around like it's nobody's business. Whether we know about your Prime Ministers was not important to the school system, not to ourselves. Canadians are just as out of touch with their heritage and the world around them, as Americans. Most of Canadian Government doesn't take care of their people half as well as they should. People have to struggle to get jobs, to get anything. Other than healthcare.

We can't take care of our own? Why don't we go talk to some people on the Gulf Caost about taking care of your own. Those who live in glass houses should throw stones, my dear.

(btw, this is said with all the love in the world. Simply a difference of opinion of course )

[Guest lightgoddess]

Ok, let's look at things logically for a moment. The reason the white protestants on the eastern seaboard are credited with founding the US is not because they were the first. It's because they were the first to make it WORK. They put their heads together and came up with a way to fight oppression. They banded the colonies together and set out on their own.

Where I have my biggest problem with 'changing' the history books is not changing them to include all of the peoples who worked to build America, but no doubt, the focus shift from important figures because they are white to other figures in history because they are minorities. While MLK Jr. was most certainly a very important figure in the civil rights era and there are chapters upon chapters dedicated to him and the fight for equal rights in the 1960's, I find events such as the Cuban Missile Crisis and the moonwalk just as important. Ten years ago when I was in American history, there were several chapters on the civil rights movement and quite a bit of focus on the major players, compared to the small articles on both the Cuban Missile Crisis and the moonwalk. They were both thrown in as kind of an aside. Those were major damn events in American history and just as important as the civil rights movement!!

The problem with America today is all the PC bullshit. This 'include everyone' BS irritates me. History is, at best, inaccurate, and never simply black and white, so no matter what someone is going to be left out. At the rate political correctness is going, major people in history are going to be replaced for being 'too white' while the lesser players are going to come to the fore because 'they are of a minority'. Yes, let's taint our children's and grandchildren's history and forget about the men who risked their lives to walk on the moon in favor of three weeks talking about the guy who invented the refridgerated truck.

I say hit the high points in our history:

Columbus...Oh, wait, he didn't actually discover America...that was the Vikings, like, 500 years before...

The Colonies

The Boston Tea Party

The Revolutionary War

The Lousiana Purchase and Louis and Clark...Oh, wait, two white guys, can't include them...We'll talk about their Indian guide...

Civil War and Reconstruction

On and on up through WWI & II, the Civil Rights movement and Little Rock 9, the moonwalk, Vietnam, Korea, Water Gate, The Cold War, Bill Clinton's presidency, 9/11...

Definately give credit where it is due, but really, other than in the Alamo where have their been major life changing, world changing events centered around a Mexican? (I also could use some enlightning here...) It is utterly iimpossible to include everyone in a history text. I was taught, again 10 years ago, about the Spaniards in Florida and others around our nation when it was being born. Is there really more to say about the Spaniards in Florida other than to mention the mission at St. Augustine? Was their saving the heathen indians more important than the writing of the Constitution??

[StoryJunkie]

I don't think that the history I learned in high school was inclusive enough. I took what I like to call "fake world history" in 10th grade, mainly because our teacher skipped most of the chapters on Africa, Asia, and South America and we only got North American and European history. And when I kindly mentioned this, he receded into "I'm one of those teachers that DOESN'T like kids who know too much" mode and told me to go back to my seat.

And he's the reason I'm completely lost in my required college course of African Civilization.

*shakes head at Arkansas' bad public education system*

Yeah, I'm bitter. I'm paying for this.

My dad was a teacher and a favorite saying of his was: "ignorance is better than 1/2 knowledge"

I never quite knew what he meant. It may have been a rant after watching the news or something.

When it comes to history, though, who can know everything? The natives claim that the whites deliberately gave them blankets infected with smallpox. (Can smallpox be distributed like that? I don't know.) There was a really bad epidemic at the end of the 1800's that killed a lot of people, not just the native population, but entire villages were desimated here in NA. They had absolutely no defense against it.

That's why documentation is so important. There are a lot of rumors, and no doubt they may have been true to a certain extent, but when it comes to crimes, and crimes of great magnitude, there better be good hard evidence to back it up. Maybe that's all history is: a series of crimes.

I remember when I was young and "Custer's Last Stand" was touted to have been a slaughter that no one survived. (which, when you think of it, is somewhat impossible). Later on, I was surprised to learn that the Natives won that battle. The natives knew the truth for decades before the whites changed their history to reflect that fact. (Hence the movie: "Battle of Little Big Horn")

I do think the government suppresses information and feeds to its people what it wants them to know. (obviously, they did not want the people of that time to know much) Another example is what happened in the Dakotas where an entire nation was slaughtered for no other reason that they didn't want to leave their land and go live on a reservation.

Because Native history was not recorded, and only oral tradition was used, some of what they say is backed up by military records, and so, taught as history. It's pretty mind-boggling when it comes to man's inhumanity to man.

[Guest chibi4president]

Then again, I remember going through Atlanta on a road trip and seeing a billboard saying that knowledge was evil and against god.

Sounds like someone took the story of Adam and Eve far too literally...

Alas, this is the Bible Belt.

[Guest Adara]

We can't take care of our own? Why don't we go talk to some people on the Gulf Caost about taking care of your own. Those who live in glass houses should throw stones, my dear.

(btw, this is said with all the love in the world. Simply a difference of opinion of course )

I agree. But I never said that the US does EVERYTHING to take care of its people. That is an impossibility. Trying to make everyone happy isn't obviously working.

But when said Canadian Government (that is, the one prior to Stephen Harper's who actually seems to be pushing the country to even itself out.) screws over its people, and I know that from personal experience, what can truly be said?

I know more Canadians who have higher education; Doctors, Registered Nurses and such, who are better of driving taxis. I know many who've had to take jobs such as this, because they can't find work. Most are now only making enough money to go down to the US.

In all honesty, History is important, but what good does it do us if the country is loosing out in its people, because it's not nurturing them? I came to Canada knowing little of the country, knowing much of my own, coming to people who knew some about their country and only news bites to base their opinion of the country below them. Not that it stopped many from crass comments and jokes.

I know that people outside of the US most likely, or really don't, like us. But to go and claim they're "smarter" yet have never really been outside of their country to prove it? I think that's far fetched. I've met many intelligent Canadians, or more to say, intelligent people. Smart is smart REGARDLESS of nationality. I gave them the chance, why can't most Canadians do the same?