Calls to make black, asian and minority ethnic history compulsory

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

I'd hope you're aware of the irony of what you're saying there, but I'm not sure that you are.

So how many major non-white figures in UK history? If they don't exist or are only a few, they can't be taught about.
Is the teaching of UK History a deluge about white males who had a minor impact? Including somebody in a subject, shouldn't based upon whether they come from a "special" group. It should be about what they achieved regardless of any groups they are in.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So how many major non-white figures in UK history? If they don't exist or are only a few, they can't be taught about.
Is the teaching of UK History a deluge about white males who had a minor impact? Including somebody in a subject, shouldn't based upon whether they come from a "special" group. It should be about what they achieved regardless of any groups they are in.

You've just contradicted yourself.

'If they don't exist or are only a few, they can't be taught about'


' It should be about what they achieved regardless of any groups they are in'


The very fact that your asking how many major non white figures are there in UK history is direct evidence of how our history has been tailored to remove them.

Plenty of ways for you to find the evidence yourself, I'm not sure why you expect it to be presented on a platter to you.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chris

A well-rounded understanding of our history lies not the reciting of names and dates, but in attempts to understand how ordinary people actually put in the grunt work to build and maintain and grow Britain to the place it is today. If we achieve that, then people of all backgrounds should be properly represented.

I remember, and people of my age probably will too, a programme we used to watch at school called "How we used to live", which IIRC detailed the lives of different classes of normal people in the Victorian era.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So how many major non-white figures in UK history? If they don't exist or are only a few, they can't be taught about.
Is the teaching of UK History a deluge about white males who had a minor impact? Including somebody in a subject, shouldn't based upon whether they come from a "special" group. It should be about what they achieved regardless of any groups they are in.

History isn't just about major figures. Some of the best history I've enjoyed is about unknown people that I can personally relate to.

It's false equivalence anyways to talk about major non-white figures. Our own history both in the UK and our iteractions with the rest of the World mean that becoming a major non-white person in UK history was much more difficult.

And a lot of we count as the history of the UK was written by upper clast white males, so minimised minor people from all backgrounds, races and genders.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

He didn’t say Italy = Rome. He said a “certain empire” was Italian-based, which it was. Italy was a distinct geographical entity at the time of Rome’s rising and became a privileged province of the empire. And Rome was based there.

Yup, got it. He is waiting for Italy to apologise because the Romans invaded Britain

I'm also waiting for Norway, France, Denmark, and Germany to apologise while we're at it

Originally Posted by Pierre

I remember, and people of my age probably will too, a programme we used to watch at school called "How we used to live", which IIRC detailed the lives of different classes of normal people in the Victorian era.

There were several seasons of that programme - one my my siblings got WW1; I got WW2. Whatever period it was covering it was always interested in social history. The WW2 series is all set in one street and follows it from before the war to afterwards. It focuses on air raid precautions, frugality (“make good and mend” and so on) and IIRC a GI bride in one of the last instalments.

In one episode, an old woman is killed when a stray bomb lands on her house. After we saw it, we made up a song about how the old bag was dead. Then some of us noticed our class teacher, a fairly elderly woman, was wiping away a tear. Years afterwards I realised she would have been old enough to have been personally touched by stuff we saw in that series.

(Edit) - turns out there is a lot more How We Used to Live than I realised. From the description I saw series 4, and the old woman who got bombed was Mrs Battersby (I thought I’d remembered that but wasn’t certain). We sang “Old bag Battersby is dead” repeatedly. Ah to be a 10 year old boy again.


---------- Post added at 10:10 ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

Yup, got it. He is waiting for Italy to apologise because the Romans invaded Britain

I'm also waiting for Norway, France, Denmark, and Germany to apologise while we're at it

But Italy is the successor state Obviously the argument is a reductio ad absurdum but the question perhaps is, where do you stop? At what point do we stop being culpable for the actions of our ancestors? And if we’re not culpable, what does an apology achieve?

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So no other countries had empires? Did history not exist before the British Empire arrived. Still intended to be highly selective and anti-White British.

Why is teaching about our country's past "anti-White British"?

What other countries did at the time is orthogonal to what we did. If our neighbours invaded countries while we did, does that excuse us doing it?

---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

But Italy is the successor state Obviously the argument is a reductio ad absurdum but the question perhaps is, where do you stop? At what point do we stop being culpable for the actions of our ancestors? And if we’re not culpable, what does an apology achieve?

Italy was not the "successor" state. There were many intermediate entities e.g. the Ostrogoths, the City States (Milan, Florence, Pisa, Siena, Genoa, Ferrara, Mantua, Verona and Venice), the Duchy of Tuscany, the Papal States, etc.

In contrast, the UK of Georgian and Victorian periods has direct lineage in terms of governance, continuity & ownership to the UK of today. There is a world of difference between the two examples.

Originally Posted by ianch99

Why is teaching about our country's past "anti-White British"?

What other countries did at the time is orthogonal to what we did. If our neighbours invaded countries while we did, does that excuse us doing it?

---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 ----------



Italy was not the "successor state. There were many intermediate entities e.g. the Ostrogoths, the City States (Milan, Florence, Pisa, Siena, Genoa, Ferrara, Mantua, Verona and Venice), the Duchy of Tuscany, the Papal States, etc.

In contrast, the UK of Georgian and Victorian periods has direct lineage in terms of governance, continuity & ownership to the UK of today. There is a world of difference between the two examples.

So, to address my question, how many intermediate entities insulate a modern government from the sins of a predecessor? Only one? Or does it take several? And in what sense does continuity of ownership transfer responsibility for events beyond living memory?

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Chris

So, to address my question, how many intermediate entities insulate a modern government from the sins of a predecessor? Only one? Or does it take several? And in what sense does continuity of ownership transfer responsibility for events beyond living memory?

Perhaps when they acknowledge that past actions were wrong and ensure that those sins aren't repeated.

That's ensure, not promise....

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Perhaps when they acknowledge that past actions were wrong and ensure that those sins aren't repeated.

That's ensure, not promise....

Ensure is actually a very useful term here, because it allows us to address the nature of the handover of power from one entity to another. A democratically managed continuity in itself won’t ensure change because the new administration inherits established policies and a civil service that doesn’t readily change ingrained practices. Societal collapse or invasion might ensure change but even here I’d say it’s not guaranteed. It would depend on the invader’s objectives.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Chris

Ensure is actually a very useful term here, because it allows us to address the nature of the handover of power from one entity to another. A democratically managed continuity in itself won’t ensure change because the new administration inherits established policies and a civil service that doesn’t readily change ingrained practices. Societal collapse or invasion might ensure change but even here I’d say it’s not guaranteed. It would depend on the invader’s objectives.

In this instance, the recognition of past events and their acceptance of wrong doing SHOULD be the driver for change.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So teachers are distinguishing between West African and Afro-Caribbean children, and somehow giving the Afro-Caribbean children a worse education, all within the same class?


Subjects that are studied purely because they are interesting, tend to have little or limited use in the real world. Subjects which are of real use, tend to be a barrage of facts. No getting around that.

No, the education system and associated syllabi are less successful at engaging people from certain backgrounds and we need to understand why this is the case. If the education system is changed so more people are encouraged to fulfill their potential, that is a power of good for both the individuals concerned and the greater society.

Subjects can be fact heavy but, if taught in the right way, also be interesting. The strongest piece of advice I give my kids and their peers is to study subjects that interest them and follow their nose but don't be afraid to change as your interests develop and they see new opportunities. My eldest was interest in astrophysics a few years back but a bad physics teacher kind of killed that off. She has excellent computer science and biology teachers who really engage well with her so that's the direction she is motivated to go in now with her A-levels along with maths and spanish

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

So, to address my question, how many intermediate entities insulate a modern government from the sins of a predecessor? Only one? Or does it take several? And in what sense does continuity of ownership transfer responsibility for events beyond living memory?

That is a judgment call, there is no absolute equation. I would argue that the British Empire has direct continuity to the UK of today and so, as a result, a discussion of awareness, responsibility and recognition is valid.

Originally Posted by ianch99

Yup, got it. He is waiting for Italy to apologise because the Romans invaded Britain

.. and took us as slaves, but yes.

Originally Posted by ianch99

I'm also waiting for Norway, France, Denmark, and Germany to apologise while we're at it

For what ?

---------- Post added at 19:12 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

I would argue ...

We've noticed.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Paul

..

For what ?

Vikings, Norman's and Anglo Saxons I'd imagine...