English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i've read some of the new high school history text books and it's telling only half of what we read about history 30 some odd years ago, how do they get away with changing history, is this not like hitler in germany

2007-01-02 08:06:04 · 13 answers · asked by DukeofDixie 7 in Arts & Humanities History

13 answers

Take a minute and read more books - what you are defining as "liberals rewriting history" is actually what's known as objective reporting. I agree that history books for grade school are woefully thin, but think about it: most textbooks are written, edited, and published in the heart of Texas. It's not likely that they are written with a liberal bias.

2007-01-02 08:11:40 · answer #1 · answered by fortinbrasmonkey 3 · 3 1

The history we studied 30 odd years ago was much more narrow in focus. Times change and now a lot has been added as well as 30 odd years of history. A book and a teacher's time is finite, so just like our history books, there was a picking and choosing. Many writers select different subjects, sometimes enough to appear "liberal".

Textbooks are chosen by a comittee in most states, so the choice reflects the committee's atitude.

2007-01-02 08:14:14 · answer #2 · answered by Sophist 7 · 3 0

They are not 'changing' history per se.

History books are nothing but one person's perception of the available information they've been able to glean and consolidate.

Remember, history is an opinion, not a fact. They can USE facts to drive home their point.

If you know differently, then the fact is that they are not really changing history, are they?

All research papers in college have to be backed up by the resources they used to claim their statements. It should work the same way with history books. If they're not backed up by resources, then you shouldn't truly count on it.

2007-01-02 08:16:13 · answer #3 · answered by Ambassador Z 4 · 2 0

I would agree with you that the content of school history books is constrained. Primarily it is a matter of space, there is a limit. However, there is also an editing that reflects the perspectives of those who write these history books.

This is not unique to our times. You should read the history books published subsequent to the Civil War and then read them again 25 years later and compare both to our times, you would think that you are reading about different events. History books, for school and popular consumption, will reflect views of the times even though those views are altered due to a number of elements.

Those who are interested in specific eras and events of history would do themselves well by becoming familiar of those historians who study specific segments and become experts. It is best to read those historians who have varied, if not conflicting, perspectives. To simply read a book about a singular historical event will provide a narrow understanding. Understanding history is a lifetime effort.

2007-01-02 08:29:11 · answer #4 · answered by Randy 7 · 0 1

I have spent a bit of time in the text book business working with K-12 as well as college and university texts. Insofar as K-12 books are concerned, the governing states that virtually dictate all text books are Texas and Florida - neither are liberal states.

The reason that this situation exist is that Texas and Florida, both highly populated states, have state wide adoption of texts while other states may choose several from which school systems are bound to select. So, insofar as history books are concerned, two very conservative states select those books. It is not worth the text publishers time to produce other books for the smaller markets, so the other states get to choose from the variety that were to be published by publishers whose books were not accepted by Florida and Texas.

Therefore, you premise is weak in the first place.

The university market is quite different. While some schools mandate a single text for American History, most allow professors to chose what they want. Therefore there is a larger variety of texts available for colleges and universities than there are for K-12.

What causes the washout, or the changing of history texts, can be very simple things. The woman's movement, the placing of information about blacks, other current events, or just about anything. States are always changing the curriculum.

If you are putting forth a religious view, the history that your parents were taught is a bit blemished. If you think, for instance, that the pilgrims came over here for religious freedom, you are misinformed. The situation with religious freedom in 1620 was very similar to what it was during the Cromwellian Civil War in England with the round heads (Puritans, Presbyterians, and Baptists) getting their way until Cromwell died.

If they came over here to have religious freedom, why, then, did they kick Roger Williams out of Mass. and chase him into Rhode Island. Roger Williams is the founder of the Baptist Church in the US.

The history courses have been water down horribly, a lot of it because things that happened long ago had little ( or some think they had little) effect on what is happening today. Take, for instance, the Quasi War with France fought during John Adams' presidency and the Barbary War, fought during Jefferson's presidency. Don't know anything about them? They have been given no time at all in history books for at least 40 years. But they happened.

Interestingly, right before we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, I wrote a piece, published in two countries and on two continents, on an aspect of the Barbary Wars. Books were plentiful and I bought my research material. Because few knew that the first enemy off of American shore was Islamic, when the wars started, the used books on the market disappeared from used book shelves as scholars jerked them up to write materials on their own. They are still gone.

Americans knew nothing about how Islamic governments fought wars and the study of the Barbary Wars gives a great insight. It seems now that we have found out that leopards don't change their spots, they are fighting these today in the same manner. But no one knew that was going to happen.

Regional situations exist. In the south, where I am, they spend a lot of time on the Civil War, discussing each battle in detail as if it would mean something to people today. It does not.

History is not what a history buff does - play around with semi-subjects like the Civil War, it is nothing but cause and effect. What, therefore, is important about the Civil War is not battles, but what caused the war and what the effects were (are). If, for instance, you think it was fought to free the slaves, then you are wrong. How many people actually have ever heard that Karl Marx travelled extensively in the US during that time and contributed articles to the NY Herald on the war. He thought it was the great proletariat uprising that he foresaw.

Things change, time changes, courses change. If you want to study American History correctly, go into the myriad of individual volumes of authored books and study it from start to finish.

2007-01-02 11:22:02 · answer #5 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 0 0

this is nothing like Hitler trying to rewrite history and is no way "liberal" propaganda. 30 years ago history books were filled with information from 30 years ago. New information is being discovered frequently by historians. This information includes historical contributions by minorities and women, military and government recently declassified documents etc. If you believe history lies dormant you are sadly mistaken.

2007-01-02 08:15:34 · answer #6 · answered by MyNameHere 3 · 2 1

i agree. for american history at least. the founding fathers were strong christians and this country is basiacally a christian nation. but now everything has to be "politically correct" and so we can't say the truth. we can't say that this is a christian nation even though it is because we might "offend" someone. now we promote freedom of religion. no one looks down on you if you practice some crazy thing like devil worship but if you are a christian you are automatically labeled a hipocrite or else people think you are "outdated," thinking like we are stuck back in the 1800s or something and no one wants anything to do with us. i do think it's rediculous that this was founded as a christian nation and yet we can't even have something like the 10 commandments on display or our christian principles in our history books.

2007-01-02 09:07:30 · answer #7 · answered by it's me 3 · 0 1

well..
I dont know if in the states, but in Mexico we have a saying.."Quien gana, escribe la historia" (who that wins, writes the story).

Probably they are just trying to rewrite whatever they want the new children to know on their own convinience, thinkning no one will notice..

What I think it could be best its to write the the editorials of the history books and complain about the half of information missing and see what they say..
good luck!

ps this might be very educational believe it or not to your students, teach them that they shouldnt trust everything they read, hear, see on books, internet, etc; that most of the time, specially in this time of days you have to be very carefull with information, we got TONS of it.. and not necessarily true.

2007-01-02 08:40:34 · answer #8 · answered by luisa 3 · 0 1

Hahah what? No seriously, what are you talking about? First there's a liberal bias in the media and now there's on in history books?! Holy Vishnu when will the reps stop

2007-01-02 08:14:31 · answer #9 · answered by of_bright_lights 2 · 0 2

That's funny that you should ask, because actually liberal people are more likely to keep in what really happened, and do so with a less-biassed view than those not considered liberal.

I'm glad to see that you've noticed that textbooks aren't the final authority on things. I wish you continued success in realizing similar things.

2007-01-02 08:18:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers