- This topic has 550 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by
urbanrealtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 14, 2011 at 1:42 PM #667343February 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM #666219
Anonymous
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The teacher in my son’s 7th grade history class spent exactly one day explaining the significance of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Gettysburg Address, but a full week (complete with mandatory class project) on Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. My son and his classmates were told that the Civil War was fought over slavery (it wasn’t), and nary a mention of the real reasons behind the war.[/quote]
I agree that the PC stuff is out of control in education.
The vast majority of our history is the consequence of decisions made by white men – there is simply no way around it. It’s reasonable to include some discussion on the impact of these decisions on others, but any attempt to give equal time to all races and both genders will always result in a distortion of history.
Regarding your examples, I’m not sure that the specifics of the Battle of Gettysburg are all that important. (BTW my dad was a Civil War buff, and we spent more than one family vacation touring the battlefield.) Probably the most important fact about the battle, other than it being a “turning point” in the war, was the sheer magnitude of the loss of life. The casualties from just a single day in the Civil War often outnumbered the totals in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the only time Americans really experienced total war.
People smarter than me have debated many aspects of our history for a long time. I personally have to agree with Brian on the slavery thing. At best, one can claim that it is debatable, but (almost) every war is about economics, and the Civil War was not one of the exceptions.
To say that the war was about slavery is an oversimplification. To say that it was not about slavery is an even greater oversimplification. The argument that it was about “states rights” is really just a semantic one, since the southern states cared most about their “right” to keep slaves.
We aren’t going to settle this debate here, but we can agree that the lesson that our kids should be learning is that there is in fact a debate among credible historians, and slavery was at least one of the reasons, if not the prevailing one.
I dunno how to get rid of all the PC crap in our schools. There is crap from the other side as well – just look at what is going on in Texas as well as the “intelligent design” pseudo-science nonsense. Now some are removing Thomas Jefferson from textbooks because some of his ideas sound a little too “liberal.” So now we ignore the guys who founded the world’s first liberal democracy because “liberal” is a dirty, UnAmerican word.
I used to think homeschooling was absurd, but these days it’s looking more attractive.
February 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM #666279Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The teacher in my son’s 7th grade history class spent exactly one day explaining the significance of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Gettysburg Address, but a full week (complete with mandatory class project) on Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. My son and his classmates were told that the Civil War was fought over slavery (it wasn’t), and nary a mention of the real reasons behind the war.[/quote]
I agree that the PC stuff is out of control in education.
The vast majority of our history is the consequence of decisions made by white men – there is simply no way around it. It’s reasonable to include some discussion on the impact of these decisions on others, but any attempt to give equal time to all races and both genders will always result in a distortion of history.
Regarding your examples, I’m not sure that the specifics of the Battle of Gettysburg are all that important. (BTW my dad was a Civil War buff, and we spent more than one family vacation touring the battlefield.) Probably the most important fact about the battle, other than it being a “turning point” in the war, was the sheer magnitude of the loss of life. The casualties from just a single day in the Civil War often outnumbered the totals in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the only time Americans really experienced total war.
People smarter than me have debated many aspects of our history for a long time. I personally have to agree with Brian on the slavery thing. At best, one can claim that it is debatable, but (almost) every war is about economics, and the Civil War was not one of the exceptions.
To say that the war was about slavery is an oversimplification. To say that it was not about slavery is an even greater oversimplification. The argument that it was about “states rights” is really just a semantic one, since the southern states cared most about their “right” to keep slaves.
We aren’t going to settle this debate here, but we can agree that the lesson that our kids should be learning is that there is in fact a debate among credible historians, and slavery was at least one of the reasons, if not the prevailing one.
I dunno how to get rid of all the PC crap in our schools. There is crap from the other side as well – just look at what is going on in Texas as well as the “intelligent design” pseudo-science nonsense. Now some are removing Thomas Jefferson from textbooks because some of his ideas sound a little too “liberal.” So now we ignore the guys who founded the world’s first liberal democracy because “liberal” is a dirty, UnAmerican word.
I used to think homeschooling was absurd, but these days it’s looking more attractive.
February 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM #666882Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The teacher in my son’s 7th grade history class spent exactly one day explaining the significance of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Gettysburg Address, but a full week (complete with mandatory class project) on Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. My son and his classmates were told that the Civil War was fought over slavery (it wasn’t), and nary a mention of the real reasons behind the war.[/quote]
I agree that the PC stuff is out of control in education.
The vast majority of our history is the consequence of decisions made by white men – there is simply no way around it. It’s reasonable to include some discussion on the impact of these decisions on others, but any attempt to give equal time to all races and both genders will always result in a distortion of history.
Regarding your examples, I’m not sure that the specifics of the Battle of Gettysburg are all that important. (BTW my dad was a Civil War buff, and we spent more than one family vacation touring the battlefield.) Probably the most important fact about the battle, other than it being a “turning point” in the war, was the sheer magnitude of the loss of life. The casualties from just a single day in the Civil War often outnumbered the totals in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the only time Americans really experienced total war.
People smarter than me have debated many aspects of our history for a long time. I personally have to agree with Brian on the slavery thing. At best, one can claim that it is debatable, but (almost) every war is about economics, and the Civil War was not one of the exceptions.
To say that the war was about slavery is an oversimplification. To say that it was not about slavery is an even greater oversimplification. The argument that it was about “states rights” is really just a semantic one, since the southern states cared most about their “right” to keep slaves.
We aren’t going to settle this debate here, but we can agree that the lesson that our kids should be learning is that there is in fact a debate among credible historians, and slavery was at least one of the reasons, if not the prevailing one.
I dunno how to get rid of all the PC crap in our schools. There is crap from the other side as well – just look at what is going on in Texas as well as the “intelligent design” pseudo-science nonsense. Now some are removing Thomas Jefferson from textbooks because some of his ideas sound a little too “liberal.” So now we ignore the guys who founded the world’s first liberal democracy because “liberal” is a dirty, UnAmerican word.
I used to think homeschooling was absurd, but these days it’s looking more attractive.
February 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM #667021Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The teacher in my son’s 7th grade history class spent exactly one day explaining the significance of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Gettysburg Address, but a full week (complete with mandatory class project) on Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. My son and his classmates were told that the Civil War was fought over slavery (it wasn’t), and nary a mention of the real reasons behind the war.[/quote]
I agree that the PC stuff is out of control in education.
The vast majority of our history is the consequence of decisions made by white men – there is simply no way around it. It’s reasonable to include some discussion on the impact of these decisions on others, but any attempt to give equal time to all races and both genders will always result in a distortion of history.
Regarding your examples, I’m not sure that the specifics of the Battle of Gettysburg are all that important. (BTW my dad was a Civil War buff, and we spent more than one family vacation touring the battlefield.) Probably the most important fact about the battle, other than it being a “turning point” in the war, was the sheer magnitude of the loss of life. The casualties from just a single day in the Civil War often outnumbered the totals in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the only time Americans really experienced total war.
People smarter than me have debated many aspects of our history for a long time. I personally have to agree with Brian on the slavery thing. At best, one can claim that it is debatable, but (almost) every war is about economics, and the Civil War was not one of the exceptions.
To say that the war was about slavery is an oversimplification. To say that it was not about slavery is an even greater oversimplification. The argument that it was about “states rights” is really just a semantic one, since the southern states cared most about their “right” to keep slaves.
We aren’t going to settle this debate here, but we can agree that the lesson that our kids should be learning is that there is in fact a debate among credible historians, and slavery was at least one of the reasons, if not the prevailing one.
I dunno how to get rid of all the PC crap in our schools. There is crap from the other side as well – just look at what is going on in Texas as well as the “intelligent design” pseudo-science nonsense. Now some are removing Thomas Jefferson from textbooks because some of his ideas sound a little too “liberal.” So now we ignore the guys who founded the world’s first liberal democracy because “liberal” is a dirty, UnAmerican word.
I used to think homeschooling was absurd, but these days it’s looking more attractive.
February 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM #667356Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The teacher in my son’s 7th grade history class spent exactly one day explaining the significance of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Gettysburg Address, but a full week (complete with mandatory class project) on Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. My son and his classmates were told that the Civil War was fought over slavery (it wasn’t), and nary a mention of the real reasons behind the war.[/quote]
I agree that the PC stuff is out of control in education.
The vast majority of our history is the consequence of decisions made by white men – there is simply no way around it. It’s reasonable to include some discussion on the impact of these decisions on others, but any attempt to give equal time to all races and both genders will always result in a distortion of history.
Regarding your examples, I’m not sure that the specifics of the Battle of Gettysburg are all that important. (BTW my dad was a Civil War buff, and we spent more than one family vacation touring the battlefield.) Probably the most important fact about the battle, other than it being a “turning point” in the war, was the sheer magnitude of the loss of life. The casualties from just a single day in the Civil War often outnumbered the totals in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the only time Americans really experienced total war.
People smarter than me have debated many aspects of our history for a long time. I personally have to agree with Brian on the slavery thing. At best, one can claim that it is debatable, but (almost) every war is about economics, and the Civil War was not one of the exceptions.
To say that the war was about slavery is an oversimplification. To say that it was not about slavery is an even greater oversimplification. The argument that it was about “states rights” is really just a semantic one, since the southern states cared most about their “right” to keep slaves.
We aren’t going to settle this debate here, but we can agree that the lesson that our kids should be learning is that there is in fact a debate among credible historians, and slavery was at least one of the reasons, if not the prevailing one.
I dunno how to get rid of all the PC crap in our schools. There is crap from the other side as well – just look at what is going on in Texas as well as the “intelligent design” pseudo-science nonsense. Now some are removing Thomas Jefferson from textbooks because some of his ideas sound a little too “liberal.” So now we ignore the guys who founded the world’s first liberal democracy because “liberal” is a dirty, UnAmerican word.
I used to think homeschooling was absurd, but these days it’s looking more attractive.
February 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM #666231briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Brian: Debatable? Not from the Northern point of view. The war started in 1861, but the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t signed until 1863. Bluntly stated, the North really didn’t give much of a shit about slavery, and Lincoln’s own writings and speechs confirm this.
[/quote]From the Southern perspective it was all about slavery and their way of life.
Depriving the South of free labor and resources led to the North winning the war.
Looking back in history, slavery was a “problem” beginning in the revolutionary period. The founding fathers sidestepped the issue for consensus.
Northerners had opposed slavery and its expansion to new territories long before the start of the Civil War.
Lincoln’s feeling about slavery evolved over time. You have to look at the context of the time.
Why is that, today, the right doesn’t believe what Obama says in his speeches? If they took him at his word, they would have nothing to worry about.
Here’s what Wikipedia says on the origins of the Civil War. I know it’s Wikipedia, but still….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_WarFebruary 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM #666292Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Brian: Debatable? Not from the Northern point of view. The war started in 1861, but the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t signed until 1863. Bluntly stated, the North really didn’t give much of a shit about slavery, and Lincoln’s own writings and speechs confirm this.
[/quote]From the Southern perspective it was all about slavery and their way of life.
Depriving the South of free labor and resources led to the North winning the war.
Looking back in history, slavery was a “problem” beginning in the revolutionary period. The founding fathers sidestepped the issue for consensus.
Northerners had opposed slavery and its expansion to new territories long before the start of the Civil War.
Lincoln’s feeling about slavery evolved over time. You have to look at the context of the time.
Why is that, today, the right doesn’t believe what Obama says in his speeches? If they took him at his word, they would have nothing to worry about.
Here’s what Wikipedia says on the origins of the Civil War. I know it’s Wikipedia, but still….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_WarFebruary 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM #666895Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Brian: Debatable? Not from the Northern point of view. The war started in 1861, but the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t signed until 1863. Bluntly stated, the North really didn’t give much of a shit about slavery, and Lincoln’s own writings and speechs confirm this.
[/quote]From the Southern perspective it was all about slavery and their way of life.
Depriving the South of free labor and resources led to the North winning the war.
Looking back in history, slavery was a “problem” beginning in the revolutionary period. The founding fathers sidestepped the issue for consensus.
Northerners had opposed slavery and its expansion to new territories long before the start of the Civil War.
Lincoln’s feeling about slavery evolved over time. You have to look at the context of the time.
Why is that, today, the right doesn’t believe what Obama says in his speeches? If they took him at his word, they would have nothing to worry about.
Here’s what Wikipedia says on the origins of the Civil War. I know it’s Wikipedia, but still….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_WarFebruary 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM #667034Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Brian: Debatable? Not from the Northern point of view. The war started in 1861, but the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t signed until 1863. Bluntly stated, the North really didn’t give much of a shit about slavery, and Lincoln’s own writings and speechs confirm this.
[/quote]From the Southern perspective it was all about slavery and their way of life.
Depriving the South of free labor and resources led to the North winning the war.
Looking back in history, slavery was a “problem” beginning in the revolutionary period. The founding fathers sidestepped the issue for consensus.
Northerners had opposed slavery and its expansion to new territories long before the start of the Civil War.
Lincoln’s feeling about slavery evolved over time. You have to look at the context of the time.
Why is that, today, the right doesn’t believe what Obama says in his speeches? If they took him at his word, they would have nothing to worry about.
Here’s what Wikipedia says on the origins of the Civil War. I know it’s Wikipedia, but still….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_WarFebruary 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM #667370Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Brian: Debatable? Not from the Northern point of view. The war started in 1861, but the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t signed until 1863. Bluntly stated, the North really didn’t give much of a shit about slavery, and Lincoln’s own writings and speechs confirm this.
[/quote]From the Southern perspective it was all about slavery and their way of life.
Depriving the South of free labor and resources led to the North winning the war.
Looking back in history, slavery was a “problem” beginning in the revolutionary period. The founding fathers sidestepped the issue for consensus.
Northerners had opposed slavery and its expansion to new territories long before the start of the Civil War.
Lincoln’s feeling about slavery evolved over time. You have to look at the context of the time.
Why is that, today, the right doesn’t believe what Obama says in his speeches? If they took him at his word, they would have nothing to worry about.
Here’s what Wikipedia says on the origins of the Civil War. I know it’s Wikipedia, but still….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_WarFebruary 14, 2011 at 2:27 PM #666246Arraya
ParticipantI read a strong argument from some southerner plantation owners about how southern slaves had much better lives a than norther factory workers wage slaves – at the time they were not too far off.
February 14, 2011 at 2:27 PM #666307ParticipantI read a strong argument from some southerner plantation owners about how southern slaves had much better lives a than norther factory workers wage slaves – at the time they were not too far off.
February 14, 2011 at 2:27 PM #666910ParticipantI read a strong argument from some southerner plantation owners about how southern slaves had much better lives a than norther factory workers wage slaves – at the time they were not too far off.
February 14, 2011 at 2:27 PM #667049ParticipantI read a strong argument from some southerner plantation owners about how southern slaves had much better lives a than norther factory workers wage slaves – at the time they were not too far off.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.