Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

School history bias

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    Denerick wrote: »
    You interpreted my statement that the Empire was defended by gunboats and developed by investment as some kind of defense of the Empire. If you managed to interpret that from what I said then its pretty clear there is no point further engaging with you. You can just imagine what I said and debate with that for the rest of the thread.

    I interpreted your defence of such a statement correctly I believe. You ended the statement with "ah well" - tossing it off as if the statement was in fact not outrageous and downright bad history.

    I responded to this and the fact that we were in a discussion about what to me is an outrageous intent by the Tories to ask Ferguson to oversee the UK history curriculum for the classroom. A truly outrageous plan - but one which I understood you to be defending.


  • Options
    #33
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    MarchDub wrote: »

    I responded to this and the fact that we were in a discussion about what to me is an outrageous intent by the Tories to ask Ferguson to oversee the UK history curriculum for the classroom. A truly outrageous plan - but one which I understood you to be defending.

    I don't have this instinctively outraged reaction to Ferguson having a role in revamping the history curriculum. The proof will be in the pudding, as they say. If it ends up claiming that Warran Hastings was in fact a saint and Edmund Burke a devil you may have a point. At present your reaction is little more than hyperbole. Grievous exaggeration.


  • Options
    #34
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    Denerick wrote: »
    I don't have this instinctively outraged reaction to Ferguson having a role in revamping the history curriculum. The proof will be in the pudding, as they say. If it ends up claiming that Warran Hastings was in fact a saint and Edmund Burke a devil you may have a point. At present your reaction is little more than hyperbole. Grievous exaggeration.

    And your reaction is just that - reaction for the sake of reaction.

    I don't post hyperbole - I expect to be taken seriously. I may be wrong but I have formed the opinion that you often post here just to inflame the discussion and what, get attention for yourself? Sad.

    I really don't see the point in going any further with this. As the mod said - if you have a problem with my posts report me. I've lost interest in hearing any more from you.


  • Options
    #35
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Wevs. Anyway, here is a link to something I posted on goodreads.com in 2009 concerning Ferguson's book. More curious than anything else is my self description as an 'Irish Nationalist'... But I digress: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/6646421

    I am commenting on someone elses review. Here is the comment in full:

    "I'm somewhat skeptical of your review, considering the fact that Ferguson's penultimate argument rests in his assertion that there are 'degree's of Imperialism'. He wasn't excusing the British Empire, but he was clearly taking issue with the hyperbolic sentiments of some that regard all colonialism as essentially equal and equally repressive. And of course the great battleground of the British Empire was the two world wars, and in especially the second world war the world saw four alternative routes towards imperialism; the genocidal nazi Empire, the totalitarian Soviet Empire, the vainglorious Italian Empire and the massively cruel Japanese Empire. How does the British Empire, with its system of representative assemblies, just law and free trade compare? (And I say this as an Irish nationalist with less than a measured view of the British Empire) Its absurd to compare the British Empire, though flawed, with the totalitarian empires of fascism and socialism. I believe this is what Ferguson was primarily getting at.

    I also take issue with your complaint that he doesn't devote much time to native peoples. Fergusons book is clearly thematic and not intended as a comprehensive survey - he didn't even use footnotes for Gods sake. The theme examines how 'Britain changed the modern world' - you can hardly blame him for living up to what he promises in the introduction.

    I'm sure cultural relativists will have a hard time comprehending Fergusons book, but personally I thank him for his intruiging arguments and terrific erudition."

    (proof, if you like, that I am not 'reacting for the sake of reacting'... I have form when it comes to this)


  • Options
    #36
    Eliot Rosewater
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    I read Ferguson's book when I was in the teenage throws of Irish nationalism and I disliked it for the fact that it didn't universally condemn something I thought of as the Root Of All Evil. I sent the book to Denerick, incidentally.

    Now that I'm more rational in my evaluation of history I think I'd like to read it again. His arguments, which I ignored or intentionally forgot, do sound intriguing. I like people who are willing to challenge cultural preconceptions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    self description as an 'Irish Nationalist'


    Lol! That made me laugh.



    As someone who just finished LC history this is what I studied:


    Politics and society in Northern Ireland, 1949-1993(this was a bit of an airbrushed joke tbh)
    The pursuit of sovereignty and the impact of partition, 1912-1949
    Dictatorship and democracy in Europe, 1920-1945
    The United States and the world, 1945-1989

    Those where the optionsI chose, but there a few more, but all are very western centric.


  • Options
    #38
    grenache
    Registered Users Posts: 6,477 ✭✭✭grenache


    Denerick wrote: »
    I like what the Tories are proposing in England, enlisting Niall Ferguson to assist in revamping the curriculum.
    They could start with teaching British students all the random acts of murder their troops committed in places such as Ireland and India. The average British person still views their history through rose tinted glasses.


  • Options
    #39
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    grenache wrote: »
    The average British person still views their history through rose tinted glasses.

    Don't we all?


  • Options
    #40
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Einhard wrote: »
    Don't we all?

    The Irish Republican version of history is equally deluded as the English Imperialist one.


  • Options
    #41
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    And French Imperial history is as bad as Romanov dynastic history and Roman imperialism was as deluded as Turkish colonialism and the Nazis are as bad as …whatever your choice on that one. Heck we could just negate all bad historiography by bouncing them all off each other.

    Great. Solved that problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    MarchDub wrote: »
    And French Imperial history is as bad as Romanov dynastic history and Roman imperialism was as deluded as Turkish colonialism and the Nazis are as bad as …whatever your choice on that one. Heck we could just negate all bad historiography by bouncing them all off each other.

    Great. Solved that problem.

    Whats your point? I don't pretend there is such a thing as 'objectivity' but it is possible to create an approximation, which at least hints at an aspiration towards the said goal.


  • Options
    #43
    Fuinseog
    Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    goose2005 wrote: »
    Was thinking about my school history education (I only did it up to Junior Cert). It had an incredibly Eurocentric bias - the Muslim world got no mention, nor did China. Africa, the Americas and Australia were treated as if they didn't exist until Whitey arrived. Are there any plans to even out this account?

    the american war of independence is covered in what is a vast JC curriculum. a lot of irish history gets left out.


  • Options
    #44
    Fuinseog
    Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    the kids, well the ones that ponder on such things, must think history repeats itself- 1517 the church in crisis.
    10-15th century -wars with the muslims.


  • Options
    #45
    ValJester
    Registered Users Posts: 329 ✭✭ValJester


    delta_bravo wrote: »

    From speaking to people who made the syllabus, the greatest omission is the complete lack of detail on World War One

    I would agree with that, and also the lack of emphasis on the Land Wars and their significance in averting a second Irish Famine(a problem which is adressed in the LC curriculum).


Advertisement