freeworldgroup.com

christopher columbus committed genocide and was responsible directly for 3.5-9 million carribieans and people in mexico, and lead for the genocide of 18 million south american natives. we should stop celebrating him.

I thought that most history teachers in middle school explained this to everybody at some point. I know mine did .-.

TheKingsHills wrote:I thought that most history teachers in middle school explained this to everybody at some point. I know mine did .-.

it's good that yours did. Mine didn't and everytime I mention it to the school the history teachers get incredibly angry.

A lot of people don't know this stuff, though, for the simple fact that we still celebrate Christopher Columbus as a man of good rather than evil.

We should get whatever kingsley's middle school curriculum is.

The guy actually found a continent for Europe to lay all their criminals at.
11/10 would still celebrate his name, and I'm not even American.

Also I honestly don't care, genocides are just one sided wars.
If the Indians were better at it (or smarter strategically) then they wouldn't get slaughtered that hard.

It's literally only America who celebrates the man who discovered the West Indies. Even our British history just goes 'guy who found this place: Christopher Columbus.' And even Spain, those that funded him probably don't make nearly as big a fuss as the US.

Shadow00 wrote:The guy actually found a continent for Europe to lay all their criminals at.
11/10 would still celebrate his name, and I'm not even American.

Also I honestly don't care, genocides are just one sided wars.
If the Indians were better at it (or smarter strategically) then they wouldn't get slaughtered that hard.

it's pretty backwards to judge a civilization by the level of how hard they can systematically murder and conquer their enemies.

to call the native americans less civilized just because they were too human to invent machines of warfare to the level of Europe and Asia and did is barbaric.

and the old world called the new world savages.

Sidenote on bias in History class.

Year 7-9 (11-14) we were taught British history. Only the wars we won, only the glory of the country. We never learnt The American War of Independence or any humiliating moments like the losses they received from the Boer Wars (they also set up concentration camps during this war). It would all conflict this image of British glory.

History classes tend to only show the parts of history which support their ideals. It's practically propaganda.

Rainshard wrote:Sidenote on bias in History class.

Year 7-9 (11-14) we were taught British history. Only the wars we won, only the glory of the country. We never learnt The American War of Independence or any humiliating moments like the losses they received from the Boer Wars (they also set up concentration camps during this war). It would all conflict this image of British glory.

History classes tend to only show the parts of history which support their ideals. It's practically propaganda.

I feel sorry for your History class. Our Scots break up our Nat 5 history into three topics, And a particular unit is picked for the course depending on the school, here's our class':

Scottish Topic: Migration and Empire

British Topic: Atlantic Slave trade

World Topic: Free at last? Civil rights in the USA

Migration and Empire: It looks at the contributions of various ethnic groups to Scotland, from places such as: Ireland, Lithuania, Italy and all over the place, even Russia. Along with the way the Scots took to them, especially in the case of the Irish it shows that we weren't very fond of foreigners and many times throughout it's expressed that Scots were the ones unwilling to do some of the less paid jobs and complained when Irish workers filled them up. It also looks at how the British Empire effected Scots, through the industry it brought in, to the increase in immigration and Emigration, and it looks at how we affected other countries. (Most notably it was the Scottish education which founded several schools and universities, along with national parks entirely on John Muir's part.) And it also looks at the negative aspects, especially in Australia via the persecution of aboriginal people, not much mention of America in the negatives.

Atlantic Slave Trade: An interesting point that I've learned so far is that the Ashante kingdom in Africa's version of slavery was much less cruel than what was practiced vastly in England and to a lesser degree in Scotland, it's not for the feint of heart indeed, it does say 'it did give benefits like this that and the next thing, but enslaved people suffered through -provides a huge list of things-'.

Free at last? Civil rights in the USA: We have not began that topic yet. But what it is to look at is the time of Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks, the Ku Klux Klan, Malcom X, and that era in general.

The Divine Potato wrote:

Rainshard wrote:Sidenote on bias in History class.

Year 7-9 (11-14) we were taught British history. Only the wars we won, only the glory of the country. We never learnt The American War of Independence or any humiliating moments like the losses they received from the Boer Wars (they also set up concentration camps during this war). It would all conflict this image of British glory.

History classes tend to only show the parts of history which support their ideals. It's practically propaganda.

I feel sorry for your History class. Our Scots break up our Nat 5 history into three topics, And a particular unit is picked for the course depending on the school, here's our class':

Scottish Topic: Migration and Empire

British Topic: Atlantic Slave trade

World Topic: Free at last? Civil rights in the USA

Migration and Empire: It looks at the contributions of various ethnic groups to Scotland, from places such as: Ireland, Lithuania, Italy and all over the place, even Russia. Along with the way the Scots took to them, especially in the case of the Irish it shows that we weren't very fond of foreigners and many times throughout it's expressed that Scots were the ones unwilling to do some of the less paid jobs and complained when Irish workers filled them up. It also looks at how the British Empire effected Scots, through the industry it brought in, to the increase in immigration and Emigration, and it looks at how we affected other countries. (Most notably it was the Scottish education which founded several schools and universities, along with national parks entirely on John Muir's part.) And it also looks at the negative aspects, especially in Australia via the persecution of aboriginal people, not much mention of America in the negatives.

Atlantic Slave Trade: An interesting point that I've learned so far is that the Ashante kingdom in Africa's version of slavery was much less cruel than what was practiced vastly in England and to a lesser degree in Scotland, it's not for the feint of heart indeed, it does say 'it did give benefits like this that and the next thing, but enslaved people suffered through -provides a huge list of things-'.

Free at last? Civil rights in the USA: We have not began that topic yet. But what it is to look at is the time of Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks, the Ku Klux Klan, Malcom X, and that era in general.

That's just how it is before GCSEs.

When we do GCSEs it gets a bit less biased as we do Russia, Vietnam and the Cold War.

Rainshard wrote:

The Divine Potato wrote:

Rainshard wrote:Sidenote on bias in History class.

Year 7-9 (11-14) we were taught British history. Only the wars we won, only the glory of the country. We never learnt The American War of Independence or any humiliating moments like the losses they received from the Boer Wars (they also set up concentration camps during this war). It would all conflict this image of British glory.

History classes tend to only show the parts of history which support their ideals. It's practically propaganda.

I feel sorry for your History class. Our Scots break up our Nat 5 history into three topics, And a particular unit is picked for the course depending on the school, here's our class':

Scottish Topic: Migration and Empire

British Topic: Atlantic Slave trade

World Topic: Free at last? Civil rights in the USA

Migration and Empire: It looks at the contributions of various ethnic groups to Scotland, from places such as: Ireland, Lithuania, Italy and all over the place, even Russia. Along with the way the Scots took to them, especially in the case of the Irish it shows that we weren't very fond of foreigners and many times throughout it's expressed that Scots were the ones unwilling to do some of the less paid jobs and complained when Irish workers filled them up. It also looks at how the British Empire effected Scots, through the industry it brought in, to the increase in immigration and Emigration, and it looks at how we affected other countries. (Most notably it was the Scottish education which founded several schools and universities, along with national parks entirely on John Muir's part.) And it also looks at the negative aspects, especially in Australia via the persecution of aboriginal people, not much mention of America in the negatives.

Atlantic Slave Trade: An interesting point that I've learned so far is that the Ashante kingdom in Africa's version of slavery was much less cruel than what was practiced vastly in England and to a lesser degree in Scotland, it's not for the feint of heart indeed, it does say 'it did give benefits like this that and the next thing, but enslaved people suffered through -provides a huge list of things-'.

Free at last? Civil rights in the USA: We have not began that topic yet. But what it is to look at is the time of Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks, the Ku Klux Klan, Malcom X, and that era in general.

That's just how it is before GCSEs.

When we do GCSEs it gets a bit less biased as we do Russia, Vietnam and the Cold War.

Ah, Cool. In boredom I read through pretty much every topic on one of the notes book, and I can say, when you can give an unbiased picture on Hitler and Nazi Germany, of all topics. Then you're looking at a professional History publisher.