I was so disgusted in class yesterday (the lesson) I nearly puked (REALLY)

[rincewind]

If you don't think American's issued propaganda that was as skewed and racist as what Nazis were doing, you're dillusional:

Know Your Enemy: Japan (part 1 of 6)

[jnhay]

Ask him about Singapore and whether or not they thought they were being "freed"

This is what you get in government run schools

And we wonder why kids are stupid nowadays

It's this specific teacher, not every single one. My WWII teacher's father was actually in the war, and he tried to be as objective as possible. He even had a day where his father came in to talk to the class along with a German soldier (who is ironically a friend of his father's today).

We learned about both sides. We learned about the Rape of Nanking, but also learned about the Japanese internment camps. If anything, the class was pro-US like it should be. I'm pretty sure we watched the entire Band of Brothers series in class, while he explained in more depth, and all came out with a big appreciation for our country's effort during the war.

[skinfan133]

So you're just going to get a version of history that is more in line with your thinking as is. All teachers conservative or liberal put some matter of spin on history - it is VERY hard to find a non-revisionist history being taught.

my way of thinking? i don't want a slanted version of history, I want an objective view of history. i want facts, and what i have posted are facts that were omited by my teacher. what was taught were also valid points to a certaint degree, my problem is that it is grossly revisionist and non-objective

[skinfan133]

Didn't say it was right. It is just about impossible to take your own view out of history, mainly because history is no where near as static as it should be - we all have our own interpetation of what happened and why.

I will say it sounds like this teacher is an extreme though. I would love to hear how upset the OP would have been if the teacher glossed over things like the internment camps though.

I'm angry that we didn't cover that as well. (its in the OP somewhere lol) it wasn't mentioned at all in the lesson. its a shameful episode in our history because many of those interned were very patriotic Americans and we should all be remineded of it because it shouldn't ever be repeated. I'm a very objective observer of history, I just want it like it happened, nothing more.

[skinfan133]

It's this specific teacher, not every single one. My WWII teacher's father was actually in the war, and he tried to be as objective as possible. He even had a day where his father came in to talk to the class along with a German soldier (who is ironically a friend of his father's today).

We learned about both sides. We learned about the Rape of Nanking, but also learned about the Japanese internment camps. If anything, the class was pro-US like it should be. I'm pretty sure we watched the entire Band of Brothers series in class, while he explained in more depth, and all came out with a big appreciation for our country's effort during the war.

man I'd give anything to be in that class. my teacher's a joke (hes also the head of the history department)

[skinfan133]

If you don't think American's issued propaganda that was as skewed and racist as what Nazis were doing, you're dillusional:

Know Your Enemy: Japan (part 1 of 6)

dude its war.

i love these two http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF6wkye_nis&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by3FVKdaQyE&feature=related

edit: appart from a few things in the documentary you posted, I don't see a problem with it, and I actually swelled with pride when I read the text at the begining. lets see here, greater injustice of WWII, calling the japanese soldier inept, killing 11 million civilians. hmmmm.

[nuposse87]

my way of thinking? i don't want a slanted version of history, I want an objective view of history. i want facts, and what i have posted are facts that were omited by my teacher. what was taught were also valid points to a certaint degree, my problem is that it is grossly revisionist and non-objective

you won't ever find an objective point of history because it's humans that describe it. You want what you want to hear, and theres nothing wrong with that either, most of us want it that way.

[Hiro]

As a guy whose grandparents were effected greatly effected by the Japanese take overs, I agree wholeheartedly that the Japanese militants were to be treated without mercy. I remember hearing all the terrible stories my grandmother told me about how the Japanese soliders would take Korean babies, and either bang them on a tree or throw them up in the air so that they could land on their bayonets. They forced Chinese and Koreans to take Japanese names, and to only speak in Japanese. If any were caught speaking Korean or Chinese, they'd be lashed, or possibly even worse.

I think the one thing that concerned the Japanese that we did that I disagreed with completely was the idea of the internment camps. To me, we were taking out our anger (justified anger at that) on Japanese people who had been living here for years, trying to make a living. I find this period of history to be one our worst ones that was totally unnecessary and unjustified.

[rincewind]

edit: appart from a few things in the documentary you posted, I don't see a problem with it, and I actually swelled with pride when I read the text at the begining. lets see here, greater injustice of WWII, calling the japanese soldier inept, killing 11 million civilians. hmmmm.

:doh: :doh: :doh:

No offense - but if that's the way you feel and if you bought into that crap, I fear them giving you a machine gun and going over seas. If you seriously can't see the problem with 'we're not talking about our Japs' while they were actually throwing them into internment camps I don't know what to tell you.

I'm not saying Japan was right (they weren't) or that we were wrong - just pointing out that we used racist, brainwashing propoganda just like the enemy.

[Xameil]

History in schools is always interesting:

- If you teach anything other than the US view of things, it's propaganda. There is irony in this statement.

- If you teach any point of view you are accused of bias. They are right.

History to be understood properly need to be viewed from many different points of view. Any conflict would look completely different when viewed through the eyes of the winning side, the losing side, and a nuetral party. Everyone would argue their view is the accurate view of the war and the others are simply arguing their side of things.

History, in my opinion, should be a debated subject in the classroom. Assign groups of three to research three point of view and put together a written debate. Kids would certainly have a stronger grasp of what really happened.

funny thing about this, is it happened twice in my grade school years. One had to do with Benedict Arnold, and the other was kind of by accident when a girl in my class stood up and said the germans had every right to do what they did to the Jews. The teacher, who was Jewish I might add, made everyone quiet down since we were all yelling at this girl, and told us to listen to her point of view and we could discuss it rationally. She was a true gem of a teacher.

[Baculus]

Well, if the teacher is going to teach about WW2 and the Pacific threater, at least he should hit some of the main points you mentioned, especially the EVEN THAT STARTED OUR INVOLVEMENT. I mean, seriously, if you leave out the Pearl Harbor attack, then you are not teaching about WW2. It would similar to teaching about the European theater and not mentioning the invasion of Poland.

Obviously this teacher has an ideologically ax to grind and shouldn't be teaching this particular subject.

[rincewind]

funny thing about this, is it happened twice in my grade school years. One had to do with Benedict Arnold, and the other was kind of by accident when a girl in my class stood up and said the germans had every right to do what they did to the Jews. The teacher, who was Jewish I might add, made everyone quiet down since we were all yelling at this girl, and told us to listen to her point of view and we could discuss it rationally. She was a true gem of a teacher.

What is the Benedict Arnold story? I'm becoming more and more fascinated by him. American educational institutes seem to have completely forgotten that he was an American hero. Hell, I was never even taught what he did to become a traitor, just that he was a traitor. Oddly enough, his treason is pretty insignificant as it was caught before he could do any harm.

[Winslowalrob]

As the one of the few people on this forum with any background in history, let me weigh in with my unsolicited 2 cents:

Everyone seems to want some kind of VERDICT OF HISTORY, where a sage historian, after years of painstaking reseach, not only tells you what happened but that this person was right, or that event was wrong. A historian as judge, jury, and possibly executioner. People also believe that there is such a thing as an objective history, and that any deviation is some kind of revisionist propoganda.

If you believe in either, I am sorry to say but you are a moron. What you are looking for is not history, its heritage; a narrative the past that makes you feel better about yourself. Skinsfan13, amongst others on this board, does not give a rats ass about history but rather an explanation of past events that matches their worldview. Furthermore, there is great value in having a history taught that challenges your notions and biases: it forces you to bone up on the literature and defend your position, rather than come crying to a forum and citing from the internet. Not only will you read the text but you will be forced to read the counter-texts, giving you a feel for both sides' arguments. Furthermore, this excercise SHOULD turn you into a critical thinker, but I highly doubt that a mere undergrad ranting on a forum about the injustices of his (or her?) class will learn about the mental tools needed to become a historian. Pity. It sounds like a valuable education, if only people were not so stubborn as to not see it.

[rincewind]

As the one of the few people on this forum with any background in history, let me weigh in with my unsolicited 2 cents:

Everyone seems to want some kind of VERDICT OF HISTORY, where a sage historian, after years of painstaking reseach, not only tells you what happened but that this person was right, or that event was wrong. A historian as judge, jury, and possibly executioner. People also believe that there is such a thing as an objective history, and that any deviation is some kind of revisionist propoganda.

If you believe in either, I am sorry to say but you are a moron. What you are looking for is not history, its heritage; a narrative the past that makes you feel better about yourself. Skinsfan13, amongst others on this board, does not give a rats ass about history but rather an explanation of past events that matches their worldview. Furthermore, there is great value in having a history taught that challenges your notions and biases: it forces you to bone up on the literature and defend your position, rather than come crying to a forum and citing from the internet. Not only will you read the text but you will be forced to read the counter-texts, giving you a feel for both sides' arguments. Furthermore, this excercise SHOULD turn you into a critical thinker, but I highly doubt that a mere undergrad ranting on a forum about the injustices of his (or her?) class will learn about the mental tools needed to become a historian. Pity. It sounds like a valuable education, if only people were not so stubborn as to not see it.

:applause:

Okay, overall good post. And I agree with your overall message... but you should get off your soapbox a little - there are a lot of people here who know an awful lot about history (check out the Revolutionary War thread I started). Also, you should mention that, if true, the OP's teacher is giving a seriously skewed viewed... and one that is not really intellectually honest. How in the hell do you discuss the Pacific Theater without mentioning Pearl Harbor???

But, overall, spot on - people want historians and history teachers to be drones who stated facts and give no color - and when they do they complain about the teacher being boring. BOOO!!!

[Sarge]

As the one of the few people on this forum with any background in history, let me weigh in with my unsolicited 2 cents:

Everyone seems to want some kind of VERDICT OF HISTORY, where a sage historian, after years of painstaking reseach, not only tells you what happened but that this person was right, or that event was wrong. A historian as judge, jury, and possibly executioner. People also believe that there is such a thing as an objective history, and that any deviation is some kind of revisionist propoganda.

If you believe in either, I am sorry to say but you are a moron. What you are looking for is not history, its heritage; a narrative the past that makes you feel better about yourself. Skinsfan13, amongst others on this board, does not give a rats ass about history but rather an explanation of past events that matches their worldview. Furthermore, there is great value in having a history taught that challenges your notions and biases: it forces you to bone up on the literature and defend your position, rather than come crying to a forum and citing from the internet. Not only will you read the text but you will be forced to read the counter-texts, giving you a feel for both sides' arguments. Furthermore, this excercise SHOULD turn you into a critical thinker, but I highly doubt that a mere undergrad ranting on a forum about the injustices of his (or her?) class will learn about the mental tools needed to become a historian. Pity. It sounds like a valuable education, if only people were not so stubborn as to not see it.

Then do all that in a philosophy class. The class described is an AMERICAN history class. Or at least it's supposed to be.......

[Blackest Eyes]

I always enjoyed my history classes throughout school. My teachers were usually not biased as they tried to give us both sides of the story, then again, each side is slighty biased. But I felt better knowing that my teachers were trying to not be biased. Sucks that you had a crappy experience.

[rincewind]

Then do all that in a philosophy class. The class described is an AMERICAN history class. Or at least it's supposed to be.......

Errr.... huh? Sounds like it was American history - just with a tooooo far left perspective. Do you mean to suggest that Americans should always be portrayed in a positive light in American history? Because that would be, you know, silly.

[Sarge]

Errr.... huh? Sounds like it was American history - just with a tooooo far left perspective. Do you mean to suggest that Americans should always be portrayed in a positive light in American history? Because that would be, you know, silly.

Not at all. We've done our share of shady stuff. I think it was Omar Bradley at one time that said if the Germans had won the war, Bradley and other American generals would have been tried and executed

History is written by the victors. In this case, we won WWII. Not talking about Pearl Harbor is a veiled attempt to get the students to think or perhaps be guided into thinking, "Hmmmm, what did we do to those poor Japanese to get them to attack us?" and other silly notions

[rincewind]

Not at all. We've done our share of shady stuff. I think it was Omar Bradley at one time that said if the Germans had won the war, Bradley and other American generals would have been tried and executed

History is written by the victors. In this case, we won WWII. Not talking about Pearl Harbor is a veiled attempt to get the students to think or perhaps be guided into thinking, "Hmmmm, what did we do to those poor Japanese to get them to attack us?" and other silly notions

I wholeheartedly agree. But to say a leftist-skewed American history teacher should teach philosophy isn't fair. He should just teacher a more objective history class - having a left leaning view is fine, just make sure your students understand there are two (if not more) points of view to the story.

[Sarge]

I wholeheartedly agree. But to say a leftist-skewed American history teacher should teach philosophy isn't fair. He should just teacher a more objective history class - having a left leaning view is fine, just make sure your students understand there are two (if not more) points of view to the story.

I didn't say he/she should teach philosophy. I said the concepts of history as they are being taught in this particular class should be in a philosophy class

Someone earlier mention the Final Solution and that a girl in class thought the Germans did the right thing. I guess you could say that's a perspective of history, but philosophy class might be a better place to hear both sides

It's just that you'd have to be a Nazi and or anti-semite to agree with that perspective.

It could be offered that the teacher of this particular class has an anti-AMerican perspective of history.

[Baculus]

If you are going to discuss a historical event, such as WW2, there are certain, basic dates and events that have to be touched upon. Just ruminating about the Pacific theater without mentioning these events isn't providing a comprehensive understanding for the students and is a confusing method to teach. Discussing the Japanese-American internment camps is most certainly an element of American history, but just a shadow of the US experience in the war.

History is, of course, more then merely memorizing dates, but it is an element of learning history as a subject. It can't be just a speculative discussion of someone's subjective stance on the subject; that doesn't necessarily teach a basic foundation in the class.

I am majored in History in college, so I definitely have a personal opinion on this subject.

[isle-hawg]

Just one more example of how the public school system is failing.:doh:

[Sarge]

Just one more example of how the public school system is failing.:doh:

Correction

Government schools

[Larry]

Then do all that in a philosophy class. The class described is an AMERICAN history class. Or at least it's supposed to be.......

Which does not mean it's supposed to be a pro-American History class.

[Sarge]

Which does not mean it's supposed to be a pro-American History class.

Of course it is. It's an AMERICAN history class, taught in AMERICA. If you want an anti-American history class you go to Russia or the local chapter of the ACLU