How biased in the US Education System in History as a subject

Author: Theweakeredge

Posts

Total: 45
Topic's author
#1
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
I am currently in High School, and.... really I don't use the history information that I was taught there. I typically like to go and hind historians that have work that has been verified by other historians, using as much data as is applicable. For example; The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to "end WWII" or at least Japan's side in it. It is often presented as a dichotomy of interests: To end hundreds of thousands in an instant to end the war, or lose millions during a ground invasion. The choice, utilitarianlly anyway, seems obvious. We should reduce the loss of life on either side and stop warfare as soon as possible.

However. Here we have what seems a clear rebuke of that view:

" it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
This survey was called the "UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT" and was quote a,

"The United States Strategic Bombing Survey was established by the Secretary of War on 3 November 1944, pursuant to a directive from the late President Roosevelt. It was established for the purpose of conducting an impartial and expert study of the effects of our aerial attack on Germany, to be used in connection with air attacks on Japan and to establish a basis for evaluating air power as an instrument of military strategy, for planning the future development of the United States armed forces, and for determining future economic policies with respect to the national defense. A summary report and some 200 supporting reports containing the findings of the Survey in Germany have been published. On 15 August 1945, President Truman requested the Survey to conduct a similar study of the effects of all types of air attack in the war against Japan." 

My point, in drawing attention here is to ask, how accurate is the history taught in public schools?
#2
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
This is actually the fundamental problem of having public schools. They milk the cash teets of the state by catering to it, and even more concerning: their curriculum is dictated by it. 

Lot's of the issues that are presented as black & white of course have nuance. And while I think the US is one of the greatest countries to ever exist, that definitely doesn't mean we haven't made our fair share of mistakes. Nor do I think we're nearly as bad as the woke neo-marxists on college campuses purport us to be. Is it any coincidence that those woke neo-marxists are products of our education system? We spend all our time speaking of the Revolutionary War, why not speak about the evils of marxist ideology in the 20th century? Why not speak of current events? Sure, go over that history. But at least in the US we blow fucking class after class covering those same topics repeatedly. 

So yeah, our education system is garbage. No one recognizes just HOW garbage it is though, because we have never had a fully private system. Oh well. Ignorance is bliss. 
Topic's author
#3
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@MisterChris
Now I agree having the state-run education system is definitely not the ideal education system, but having it private? That has its own list of flaws. First of all, that can lead to even further education problems, it can be unattainable to the poor, creating an even bigger disparity between the wealthy and the impoverished, it will likely create specialized instead of generalized knowledge of history (even more than is already happening), etc, etc.. I think that what needs to happen is some kind of regulation, balancing act, for the educations system. There needs to be much more accountability on the state to fact check and have more nuanced views on what are usually seen s black and white issues. I don't think the ideal education system is private at all.
#4
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
will respond to this after class
#5
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
My point, in drawing attention here is to ask, how accurate is the history taught in public schools?

  • We should distinguish public high school history from  public college history.  High school curriculum are more subject to  the concerns of elected school boards and parents with a wide range of political agendas.  Colleges are also public schools to an important extent but are more likely to teach multiple perspectives and then require a critical analysis as output.
  • We should also anticipate bias from any source and investigate self-interest's impact on objectivity.
    • US public schools are more likely to teach that the A-bomb was a justified efficiency.
    • Japanese public schools are more likely to focus on the physical and psychological impacts and the injustice of bombing civilian populations.
    • One Italian textbook teaches that the bomb was more of a post-war power play:
      • "There was no doubt that in very little time the Japanese, already at the end of their tether, would have had to surrender ... What seems certain is that the show of force, made indiscriminately at the expense of unarmed people, increased the United States' weight in post-war tensions and decisions, especially concerning the Soviet Union. It is probably therefore that Truman's decision was inspired more by post-war prospects than by calculations on the most convenient method to put an end to the conflict with Japan."
    • Herodotus may be the first historian to apply a systematic investigation of facts to his historiography but that doesn't mean his account of the Battle of Marathon doesn't favor the Greek perspective.
  • I would guess that inaccuracy in US public school educations stems more from sins of omission than sins of self delusion particularly given a national culture that despises nuance- politically charged issues  are generally glossed over or simply omitted.
  • To make any really fair comparison between countries, you'd have to compare teachings stripped of any national political interest- a nearly inconceivable task.


Topic's author
#6
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
We should distinguish public high school history from  public college history.  High school curriculum are more subject to  the concerns of elected school boards and parents with a wide range of political agendas.  Colleges are also public schools to an important extent but are more likely to teach multiple perspectives and then require a critical analysis as output.
Fair enough, then consider this question: How accurate is the history taught in high school? High School is an important part, or at least it supposed to be, of a person's formative learning. It's supposed to build the fundamentals for more specialized fields by giving a broad education on the general subjects of the world. It is also true that a good amount of people do not go into college or  much more history than they get in high school. Not to mention introductory courses are much more likely to have biased teachings, which is what the majority of students would get. 


I would guess that inaccuracy in US public school educations stems more from sins of omission than sins of self delusion particularly given a national culture that despises nuance- politically charged issues  are generally glossed over or simply omitted.
(Note: I pretty much agree with what was said above this quote, so I didn't address it)

While it is true that a lot of history that is misrepresented in US history books is by omission there are also times where it blatantly lies, there is a line between leaving something out, and suggesting something that isn't to be is, if that makes any sense. To explain myself - yes, effectively what the history lessons did was omit this survey and the views of several military officials as well as the historic fact that the Japanese were likely to surrender before the atomic bombs were dropped, suggesting that they were the only way to end the war is a lie. If they were to leave it at, "the bombs were dropped after Truman's order" then it could be considered a lie of omission, but most programs deliberately point to the bombs being the only way to minimize casualties and put an end to the war. That sort of effect is why I think you are mistaken.


To make any really fair comparison between countries, you'd have to compare teachings stripped of any national political interest- a nearly inconceivable task.
I should make myself more clear, I don't particularly care about a comparison between America and some other country, I care about what America is spouting at it's students versus the Truth, or, at least as close to the truth as we can get. I more than recognize that sometimes in history the precise or even general truth is hard to come to, but I do think that it is very apparent that the US system can do much better than it can. I don't think this is really relevant, there doesn't need to be a comparison between countries to evaluate the accuracy of the history taught.
#7
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
Public school history should teach you what happened, not the morality of what happened. That is for ethics class. But today's public schools teach kids what happened from the point of view of liberalism.

Take WWII. I've seen schools that never teach that the Japanese attacked the US first. Only the destruction of the bomb, the suffering of the Japanese, and the moral question of whether dropping the bomb was needed.

I know high school kids who do not know what happened at Pearl Harbor, and could not tell you how many Americans were killed there. But they can give you details about the evils of dropping the bomb on Japan.

Ask any American public high school kid, how many times did the United States warn Japan and demand its surrender? You'll get blank stares.

So how is a public school student to know whether his education is correct or skewed? Here is a quick test. Find the biggest liberal and the biggest conservative in your society and find out what their answer would be to any given historical question studied at your school. Any school system that is 100% in agreement with either side is skewed.

In America today, we find that the history taught in public schools will be 100% endorsed by liberals. This tells us that what is being taught is not history, but propaganda.
#8
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
Some schools teach kids that a specific god is real and that he knocked the World together in his extra-universal workshop in a matter of days, just a few thousand years ago.

What can you do, hey?

Perhaps they should keep fairy stories for story time.....Just a thought.
#9
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Some schools teach kids that a specific god is real and that he knocked the World together in his extra-universal workshop in a matter of days, just a few thousand years ago.
Schools in Wales must suck.

What can you do, hey?
Send your kid to a US public school where they will teach them they are monkeys, life has no purpose, and pass out condoms to 8 year olds. You can do that.

Perhaps they should keep fairy stories for story time.....Just a thought.
Liberals would howl their rage. The best solution for sensible parents is to send their kids to a credible private school that does not hire libtards as teachers.
#10
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
A Madrassa for example.
#11
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
And I don't know about Welsh Schools.....I was educated in England.


But I'm pretty certain that both curricula, put forwards the modern idea of Hominids of the species Homo Sapiens.

What on Earth do they teach in U.S. nodding donkey Academies? 
Topic's author
#12
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
As someone who goes to public high school, none of the things you said they teach are things they actually teach. In fact, they teach a lot of what you think they should teach! My history class put heavy emphasis on Pearl Harbor, and nearly none on the bombs, treating them as an obvious good, that creationism is a scientific theory (its not), etc, etc.. Though perhaps my school is unique in the US Education system, I also don't see any evidence pointing towards your claims either. While it is true that a lot of universities lean left, it is not true that this correlates with a bias.
#13
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
I don't know much about the US Education system. I have no idea what and how things work there. Where I live, teachers zealously taught me that colonialism was slavery. I was taught to hate the Dutch and the spanish because they were the worst of them. The british were noticeably second though that's not saying much. WW2 had a clear bias in which we favored the axis powers (specifically japan) over our colonial rulers. 

They taught both evolution and creationism though, but with very little motivation to distinguish between the two. For example, I've only heard of Charles Darwin when I enrolled myself in college this year. 


#14
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
A Madrassa for example
The US dept of education does not allow Madrassas as schools. Though I'm sure liberals would love it. Multiculturalism and all.

And I don't know about Welsh Schools.....I was educated in England.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

But I'm pretty certain that both curricula, put forwards the modern idea of Hominids of the species Homo Sapiens.
At least you know that about Welsh schools.

What on Earth do they teach in U.S. nodding donkey Academies? 
Pretty much everything you espouse here. You could be a teacher there.
#15
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
Typically, people being brainwashed do not know they are being brainwashed. And in the best brainwashing, the brainwashed will insist that they were never brainwashed.

The BLM high school crowd wanted to cancel Abraham Lincoln as a "slaver".  Think any of them will see their brainwashing?
#16
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
I've only heard of Charles Darwin when I enrolled myself in college this year. 
Interesting.

But you have an interest in literature, like to read philosophy opinions, frequent the Dart philosophy forum, and have a current reading list of Hume, Aristotle, and Butler. Amazing that you missed Darwin with such an impressive past.
Topic's author
#17
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
That doesn't address my point, and speaking from it psychologically it is true that sometimes people who are "brain washed" are not aware; however, it is not only more often true, but it informs a more effective way of brain washing for the person to be aware that they used to think differently and their mentality was "corrected", thus making them become more defensive whenever approached with what they used to believe or when casting doubt on their current beliefs. It is all about deconstructing the person's reliance on their own thinking, that they are flawed fundamentally or ultimately their own thoughts are incorrect, and letting some higher authority make the decisions for them. This is how the military operates, and it is a necessary part of the conditioning of soldiers. So brain washing can be done for some "good", not that I am personally in favor of it, but I recognize the realistic need.

What you are probably more accurately referencing is a dynamic change in perspective, from "Abraham Lincoln is a great president" to "Abraham Lincoln is an evil slave owner." Regardless of the view you see of him, either is likely to be biased to favor one side, personally I see the man as a mixed bag. I'm not quite confident on whether he owned slaves or not, but due to how the white house and the presidency was often synonymous with slave use, it most likely true that he did own slaves. It is also true that Abraham Lincoln did not initially want to remove slavery from their bondage due to it being, quite, "unconstitutional to do so". I find such an excuse disgusting at best. On the other hand, he is the president that led the most dynamic change for captive slaves in the history of the United States, and freed millions of slaves. So while his overall actions were good, his intentions are not nearly as bold as people assume them to be. 

He is a hypocritical and fundamentally flawed person, but who overall did some brilliant things, as I said - a mixed bag
#18
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
Darwin was concerned with the development of species.

Contrary to what some theists might say,  Darwin's ideas fit just as well with a theistic version of universal events, as they do with atheistic notions of creation and unassisted material evolution.
#19
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
That doesn't address my point...
I thought it did.

...but it informs a more effective way of brain washing for the person to be aware that they used to think differently and their mentality was "corrected"...
Good point. Except that we are talking about high school kids, they are pretty much blank slates. They have no clue they are being brainwashed because they enter the school system knowing nothing.

...personally I see the man as a mixed bag.
Thank you for validating my point.
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
Six of one and half a dozen of the other.....You sound just like my dear old Mum....May her residual energy wait in peace.
#21
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Your dear old Mum sounds like she didn't much like fakery and doublespeak. My kind of girl.
Topic's author
#22
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
Yes.... ignoring all context and cherry picking statements...... you are truly the most brilliant thinker to ever exist....
#23
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
Thanks man!

Wow. An atheist wanting context. Relax twe, I didn't brainwash you.
Topic's author
#24
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
Oh my! Is that a conservative putting people in boxes? I am sooooo surprised...
#25
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
It's an interesting thing that Darwin was a Christian when he wrote Origin of Species. He became an agnostic later in life
because of the damage the loss of his daughter at a young age did to his belief in a loving God.

#26
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@ethang5
Well, I tend to blame my tyrannical government for my shortcomings. Free speech is rare in a non-secular country.
#27
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
Was missing Darwin a "shortcoming"?

The concept of free speech was conceived and developed in a non-secular countries. You're a theist in the vein of Willows.
#28
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@ethang5
Yeah, I hated the lack of free speech and I've always wanted books to read. You don't get to read a lot while living under authoritarian regimes. IMHO, third world countries (rich and poor) tend to share similar values (i.e. lack of free speech, book censorship).


#29
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
Yeah, I hated the lack of free speech...
But loved the good English education huh?

...third world countries (rich and poor)
What's a rich 3rd world country?
#30
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@ethang5
Lol. I'm not confident I'm reading your reply correctly but I'm sure you'd prefer Voltaire, Hume, Kant and Butler over whiny, conspiratorial clerics on a tirade against western culture. These things are about the only things I have where I live. There's never a shortage of anti-western clerics but there's always rich western literature to explore (albeit they're difficult to find). I doubt you'll be able to find a reason to side with anti-western sentiments.


A rich third world is Singapore, which is well known for jailing westernized asian journalists. I'm not partial to politics outside of its inconveniences on my life so this is just my opinion.