Some try to discredit our history.

[Jimmy(PA)]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,564302,00.html

I hear this is occurring with the Founding Fathers also. I wonder if they will point out Martin Luther Kings Communist ties during the Cold War or his many "lady friends"? For some reason I doubt it.

 

[teddy]

Hum? Interesting point.
It almost makes one think the media might be a tiny bit biased.

 

[pygmy]

This shouldn't happen ; getting the facts right is different but judging past events by today's standards doesn't apply.
In the 24th century I'm sure todays activies will be forgiven as folly.

 

[rjw4law]

History is whatever the school systems wants it to be.

 

[pygmy]

Home learning is increasing with greater parental involvement.
This is a good thing as I am deeply suspicious of teachers in the classroom.

 

[Smee]

I like my daughter's teacher. Great lady. Pretty too. Very smart.

My wife.

Home schooling isn't for everyone. However, it's been great for our daughter. She started school in 1st grade instead of kindergarten because she was so far ahead --- reading and understanding by age 4, doing simple math too.

This year (last years school year) at age 12 she was doing work equivilent to 2nd year college in reading (top 1% in her grade), senior in high school in mathematics. Why? Because of the close instruction possible within the home? Perhaps.

I tend to think it is more because she actually has to do the work, and even more --- she doesn't have to sit in a class that is organized (dumbed down) for the slowest learners, behaviorally challenged, etc.

 

[Newt]

I like my daughter's teacher. Great lady. Pretty too. Very smart.

My wife.

Home schooling isn't for everyone. However, it's been great for our daughter. She started school in 1st grade instead of kindergarten because she was so far ahead --- reading and understanding by age 4, doing simple math too.

This year (last years school year) at age 12 she was doing work equivilent to 2nd year college in reading (top 1% in her grade), senior in high school in mathematics. Why? Because of the close instruction possible within the home? Perhaps.

I tend to think it is more because she actually has to do the work, and even more --- she doesn't have to sit in a class that is organized (dumbed down) for the slowest learners, behaviorally challenged, etc.

Nice reply
New

 

[pygmy]

Home learning is increasing with greater parental involvement.
This is a good thing as I am deeply suspicious of teachers in the classroom.

And how then are the children to learn without teachers being in the classrooms?

This tells me Mac that you know nothing about home learning or you are deeply
suspicious of its benefits.
I think it's wonderful that a person can learn at their own pace in often an unsupervised
environment.

 

[K*E*L*L*Y]

History is whatever the school systems wants it to be.

Amen to that !!!!

this is so true! more time is spent on English and Math... and so much less on
History...

 

[johnnyi]

About the only thing that I see misleading here is the title of the article. If you bother to read it, there's no arguing that it is factual, and it sure doesn't dismiss the fact that Columbus did what he did in coming here. That fact is never dismissed. If you've got an argument with the facts then that's something else, but the truth is you don't. The facts are clear and well documented.

Maybe kids shouldn't know the whole story? How does telling the whole story "discredit" anything that shouldn't be discredited? How are we ever going to learn from history if it's just "fisher price" pablum without the sharp edges? History is what it is, and it seems all this is doing is telling more of it without all the embellishments. By the way, since when is Columbus "our" history? It seems to me that history should be viewed with an unbiased eye, where native American history, Viking exploration history, etc. all are "our" history?

 

[Jimmy(PA)]

About the only thing that I see misleading here is the title of the article. If you bother to read it, there's no arguing that it is factual, and it sure doesn't dismiss the fact that Columbus did what he did in coming here. That fact is never dismissed. If you've got an argument with the facts then that's something else, but the truth is you don't. The facts are clear and well documented.

Maybe kids shouldn't know the whole story? How does telling the whole story "discredit" anything that shouldn't be discredited? How are we ever going to learn from history if it's just "fisher price" pablum without the sharp edges? History is what it is, and it seems all this is doing is telling more of it without all the embellishments. By the way, since when is Columbus "our" history? It seems to me that history should be viewed with an unbiased eye, where native American history, Viking exploration history, etc. all are "our" history?

Well Columbus began the wave of immigration and exploration that created our country so IMO it is our history. There is a difference between telling the whole story and telling a small part of the story to portray the "evil white man" notion. People tend to forget the Indians were just as violent as the white man and not the peace loving 1960's Hollywood version portrayed in many movies. Had Indians had the white mans technology and numbers they would have killed just as many of their own people long before we arrived. One other tidbit, the Indians are not "native" to America the Indians came here from Asia just as we came here from Europe. No human race is native to the Americas.

 

[teddy]

History is whatever the school systems wants it to be.

You're exactly right.

Back in 1958 the teacher told the class "we're a Christian nation." Imagine a public school teacher saying that today.

The redefining of history actually started during the 1960's racial upheaval and picked up steam when the "Native American" and "Sovereign Nation" thing got going ca. 1970's. Today the anti-Founding Fathers mentality is running on jet fuel due to powerful anti-American entities that far exceed the treat of any who proceeded them.

For America to become what they want it to be in the future, all remembrance of what America once was must be washed out of the people's heads. Therefore our Founding Fathers must become fools and our fools must become scholars.

 

[teddy]

Home learning is increasing with greater parental involvement.
This is a good thing as I am deeply suspicious of teachers in the classroom.

And how then are the children to learn without teachers being in the classrooms?

there was a time when parents taught their kids something as well as the teachers! Back when kids legs and backs were stronger then their thumbs...

"there was a time when parents taught their kids something as well as the teachers! Back when kids legs and backs were stronger then their thumbs..."

good one!

 

[Smee]

We do teach our daughter about history . . . from both perspectives. There is what the school system teaches in their books (Columbus discovered America, yadda, yadda, yadda) as well as from our perspective as Native Americans.

The victors always write the "official" history, but it isn't always the way things really happened. Many forget the genocide that took place . . . as one person put it in their signature on another forum: "Let's talk about genocide in your backyard, in fact, genocide is the reason YOU HAVE a backyard!"

"Whitewashing" history, using the Eurocentric version, has left out much. Is it beneficial for children to hear? I think that the one instructing must consider the pupil and their level of understanding as well as how much detail they can handle. At the same time, an effort needs to be made to help the student to understand that, regardless of what happened in the past, it is only there for use as a lesson, so that those mistaked need not be made again.

History is not the same thing as current events in that --- history cannot be "made right". It is what it is and cannot be changed or even avenged. The perpetrators are no more. Their offspring cannot be expected to pay for the ancestors' mistakes. Attempts to do so only result in more damage and no healing.

Can the history in our textbooks change? Sometimes, to be more honest and truthful, they must be. History isn't always flattering or pleasant. Errors should be corrected. I think that being more truthful about this country's history may begin a healing between groups of peoples.

 

[Jimmy(PA)]

European history is really the only accurate accounts of history in North America, Indians had no written language so all history is oral and over many years oral history tends to become far more warped and open to interpretation than events written down as they actually occurred. Genocide was nothing new to the Indians, they practiced it for thousands of years. I recall a great speech by one of the Army Officers that brought in Geronimo. Geronimo made mention about the white man taking his land and the Army officer went on to give the history of all the Indian nations and lands Geronimo's ancestors had slaughtered and stolen from. Genocide is a human trait not just a white mans but of course our technology and history allowed for greater numbers and recordings of these events while on the other hand with no written history these indian tribes just vanished with the death of its peoples. I think we all have mass killers in our family tree's.

 

[Smee]

European history is really the only accurate accounts of history in North America, Indians had no written language so all history is oral and over many years oral history tends to become far more warped and open to interpretation than events written down as they actually occurred.

It's Cherokee. Did you know they have had a written language for about 200 years? So, the "Trail of Tears" stories are not just "oral history".

The above text, when translated is: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." It's Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Actually we agree much more than we disagree. In order for one group of people to take land from another, they must destroy the ones posessing it. We have had our wars among tribes, and we have killed each other. Some tribes no longer exist, not because of the white aggression, but the aggression between tribes.

In most cases, however, the land that was sought could have been obtained and peace kept if the promises of the prior treaties were kept. Unfortunately, "as long as grass grows and wind blows" didn't mean the same thing to the two cultures. My people were too trusting, too willing to "go along to get along" until there was no where else to go. When your back is against the wall, its time for action to protect what you agreed to keep from those who agreed you could keep it in exchange for giving them what they wanted. This brought about men like Techumseh. This brought about men like Crazy Horse. This brought about men like Geronimo. This is what brought about men like Russel Means and those in the A.I.M.

What's wrong with telling things like they really happened? Is it embarassing? The same ones who want to whitewash the genocide which occurred in this country raise a great cry when the President of Iran denies the Holocaust. It angers me also, but why is that history so important, while this history is ignored or even denied?

 

[LadyDigger]

European history is really the only accurate accounts of history in North America, Indians had no written language so all history is oral and over many years oral history tends to become far more warped and open to interpretation than events written down as they actually occurred.

It's Cherokee. Did you know they have had a written language for about 200 years? So, the "Trail of Tears" stories are not just "oral history".

The above text, when translated is: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." It's Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Actually we agree much more than we disagree. In order for one group of people to take land from another, they must destroy the ones posessing it. We have had our wars among tribes, and we have killed each other. Some tribes no longer exist, not because of the white aggression, but the aggression between tribes.

In most cases, however, the land that was sought could have been obtained and peace kept if the promises of the prior treaties were kept. Unfortunately, "as long as grass grows and wind blows" didn't mean the same thing to the two cultures. My people were too trusting, too willing to "go along to get along" until there was no where else to go. When your back is against the wall, its time for action to protect what you agreed to keep from those who agreed you could keep it in exchange for giving them what they wanted. This brought about men like Techumseh. This brought about men like Crazy Horse. This brought about men like Geronimo. This is what brought about men like Russel Means and those in the A.I.M.

What's wrong with telling things like they really happened? Is it embarassing? The same ones who want to whitewash the genocide which occurred in this country raise a great cry when the President of Iran denies the Holocaust. It angers me also, but why is that history so important, while this history is ignored or even denied?

Smee, you are correct on the Cherokee written language. I never knew that until we were driving to Texas to visit family and we drove through Oklahoma. My daughter's roots are there (on her father's side). Her 2nd & 3rd great grandfathers were Chief's Richardville, LaFontain(e) and Pooler. Anyways, before I found this information to add to genealogical research, I was speaking to some folks and they told me about the first written language. Even though there is NO PROOF my dau has ties to the Cherokee (as per her paternal side claims to have), I still find Native American history exciting and interesting! Here is a link to the Cherokee Language in case anyone would like to take a look at it's history. http://www.cherokee-nc.com/index.php?page=68

I also agree with homeschooling and I wish my job did not keep me from homeschooling. How do folks think kids learned before schoolhouses? Their parents. The old saying, "A parent is the child's first teacher!"

Anyways....I love Europe and it's history! Here we tear down buildings barely 100 years old and in ROME...OMG!!! Absolutelty beautiful and Greece and Germany and I could go on! LOL!

Everyday is a learning experience and each day we learn something new, no matter how young or much younger we get!

Ya'll have a great day,
Annmarie
PS: My dau is Miami, Quapaw and Ottawa. If I traced her roots correctly, she is linked to Big Turtle! Working on getting her registered with the Miami tribe! What a pain with paperwork! LOL!

 

[Jimmy(PA)]

European history is really the only accurate accounts of history in North America, Indians had no written language so all history is oral and over many years oral history tends to become far more warped and open to interpretation than events written down as they actually occurred.

It's Cherokee. Did you know they have had a written language for about 200 years? So, the "Trail of Tears" stories are not just "oral history".

The above text, when translated is: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." It's Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Actually we agree much more than we disagree. In order for one group of people to take land from another, they must destroy the ones posessing it. We have had our wars among tribes, and we have killed each other. Some tribes no longer exist, not because of the white aggression, but the aggression between tribes.

In most cases, however, the land that was sought could have been obtained and peace kept if the promises of the prior treaties were kept. Unfortunately, "as long as grass grows and wind blows" didn't mean the same thing to the two cultures. My people were too trusting, too willing to "go along to get along" until there was no where else to go. When your back is against the wall, its time for action to protect what you agreed to keep from those who agreed you could keep it in exchange for giving them what they wanted. This brought about men like Techumseh. This brought about men like Crazy Horse. This brought about men like Geronimo. This is what brought about men like Russel Means and those in the A.I.M.

What's wrong with telling things like they really happened? Is it embarassing? The same ones who want to whitewash the genocide which occurred in this country raise a great cry when the President of Iran denies the Holocaust. It angers me also, but why is that history so important, while this history is ignored or even denied?

Im not for white washing history but accurate accounts should be given, if you want to speak about the Indian dead also mention the many European woman and children who lost their lives to Indian attacks and brutal executions and if you want to put the European leaders on trial do so with the Indian chiefs. As for me i'm not embarrassed at all by the history of this era, in fact I see many of these early British regiments, Texas Units, and 7th cavalry during the Indian wars as some of the finest fighting units ever assembled. European War was actually pretty tame compared to the fighting they seen in the America's. In Europe war was basically seen as a game of chess between 2 gentleman (the generals) and rules were followed. As for me I'd rather be a captive of a European army than an Indian one from what i've read. =)