In the US most world history classes cover the greeks, romans, and the UK, but leave out most asian, african, south american, eastern europe, and middle eastern history. In other countries, what does world history focus on or leave out?
What the hell are you talking about? You must be European. Where did you hear this rumor?
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-11 13:01
Every thing you said is false. History classes today are literred with euro-distantism due to some unfounded paranoid fear of being euro-centric. Many major events in our history took place in europe and tcould have only taken place in northern europe since that was the only place someone wouldn't face execution for studying sciences and engineering. In China people were executed just for doing work they were not told to do or for trying to do something differently, the scientists of china were wasted making bell chimes and over assorted useless piles of crap when they could have been making labour saving devices to increase productivity, I guess the emperor preferred as many people to be stuck picking rice all their lives so they are easier to control. The catholics burned anyone who looked through a telescope, Galileo was like Isaac Newton, but he was tortured into submission. The Islamists and romans didn't add anything to science, just used and preserved the fruits of the brief blip of liberty in ancient greece all those centuries ago.
If anything it is libertylogicisim, since the world revolves around libertarian ideals, so it's only logical the history should focus on whoever created these ideals.
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-11 14:55
History doesn't seem to focus on the negative actions of its popular civilizations as much as the negative actions of its villified civilizations (ie Russia). Whenever the US fucks up, it gets a brief paragraph while the entire chapter glorifies western civilization.
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-11 16:05
>>6
My history class consisted of 3 semesters, colonialism, holocaust and slavery. Each of which where entirely directed towards western civilisation regardless of the fact the same was happenning across the woorld and had done for centuries before and refused to acknowledge that it was western civilisation that put an end to all 3.
Clearly euro-centric, more needs to be done to get rid of this focus on europe and glorification of the white male.
Name:
Al-Anon2006-03-12 1:59
History class in highschool is meant to educate you about your culture, where you come from, the history of your own society. In America, the history of our society comes from Europe; China is irrelevant until World War II to our history. You don't get much time in school to learn History (not as much as you should, anyway), so it's only the important stuff that you're given. European and American history is WAY more relevant to your life than whateverthehell happened in Africa 500 years ago.
You just ASSUME that because we're in AMERICA that my OWN HISTROY is not RELEVANT to ME? HOW can you just DECIDE something like that?!?!?!? WHAT IF MY ANCESTORS WERE FROM AFRICA? IS IT IRRELEVANT?
I fucking hate the white supremacist power structure for undermining the acheivements of everyoe in the world.
When the shoe is on the other foot, when you crybaby pink-skin honkies start crying about that delusion that is "reverse racism". You sound just as angry and just as unreasonable.
The next 100 years will be very interesting indeed.
Name:
102006-03-13 5:54
>>11
How strange. I don't recall ever complaining about that.
It also doesn't change that you have anger issues.
The next 100 years will be very interesting indeed.
It always has been. Where have you been?
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 7:22
>>12
Not during the 1300s. OH WOW ENGLAND HATES FRANCE SURPRISING NEWS
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 7:43
The 100 Years' War wasn't interesting? Could have fooled me.
But if you don't classify that as "interesting", there's still a whole wide world out there.
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 8:10
>>11
America for white
Africa for black
Send those apes back to the threes
Ship those niggers back
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 11:33
>>9
What tribe and or country do your ansestors hail from? Sorry but 'africa' isn't a legitiment answer. Chances are you actually are a halfbreed muslim moor from spain and not from africa. Shut the fuck up you stupid nigger.
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 20:03
History lessons merely use the history of the country you live in in order to test your resonning and deductive skills that are used by historians to interpret facts and archaeology.
Now that you know these skills you can go use them in whatever archaegology of sub-saharran african civilisations there are. Perhaps a better use of your time, if you really care about your heritage, than trying desperately to prove the Egyptians were black and calling anyone who shows facts to the contrary or criticises your lack thereof, a racist.
That's fine, except for it didn't happen that way. Any argument contrary to yours is someone calling you a "racist".
Neverminding the fact if you even BELIEVE THAT RACE EXISTS IN FIRST THE PLACE. You are a "RACIST" by definition.
Name:
Anonymous2006-03-13 21:40
>>18
So what do you call a racist who discriminates based on race? Is there a way to differentiate between the 2, or does believing there is such a thing as race immediately make me the same as skinhead thugs, KKK members and Hitler?
I am meritocratic, if a black guy is more qualified than a white guy then I'd employ the black guy. I don't think Hitler would do that.