Know-Nothings
May 16th, 2008 | 6 Comments | Politics |
After Bush’s speech in Israel yesterday in which he implied that Obama and the Democrats were appeasers just like Neville Chamberlain, the usual hired guns were trotted out to defend and amplify on talk TV and radio. Ordinarily this is not news, but something unusual happened on Hardball, when one of the puppets was asked to explain exactly what that meant.
And ordinarily I wouldn’t trouble you to watch a 7-minute YouTube clip, but this is priceless. Most of the time the know-nothingness passes unchallenged in the fast-paced video-media environment, but this time Chris Matthews grabs hold and won’t let go. The result is by turns excrutiation, sad and hilarious as his victim squirms, desperately repeating the few talking points he’d been given.
Of course what’s really sad is this same guy will probably be on the air tomorrow, on some other venue, posing as an informed commentator.
Tags: Conservatives
Ooh that was painful to watch. You think this guy who is probably a few to several years younger than us “don’t know much about history”, imagine what’s going on in high schools today. When i was in high schools, WWII took up about, oh, 10 pages in the book, American Revolution, maybe 12, Civil War, probably 7 pages, Russian Revolution, 5.
You have to take a college course particular to an event in or period of history to even get an idea of what happened. Then you have to read more on your own time and depending on your interest to really begin to understand. But most kids today won’t do that. They’d rather read Paris Hilton’s autobiography.
There are some kids that will develop an interest in history. I feel lucky that 3 outta 4 of mine are interested and the last one is coming along. They read history for their own pleasure and enlightenment. Julian particularly because he’s a very politically minded person and understands the need to know the past. History is Julians second major. Jordans was econ but he didn’t finish the second major. He said he probably would’ve made it thru the second major if it were history. Jewelle has read ‘Band of Brothers’. And some other WWII books. Unusual for a girl to be into history. But then, both her parents are history buffs and we’ve taken them to so many historic places. Maybe that generated her interest in history.
Maybe I’m paranoid, but I feel like there’s something insidiuos about the way history is being taught in schools — and to the extent it’s taught at all.
It’s always been taught badly. In September there’s the painful memorization of obscure dates. And by May, when you get to the stuff that has the most immediate relevance to what’s going on today, spring is in the air. The teachers are racing to get through to the end of the book, and the kids really don’t want to hear any more.
No wonder they can’t come up with the word “Sudetenland.”
My theory has always been that history should be taught backwards from today’s newspaper. By May, if you’ve got time left, you can learn the difference between Cabot and Hudson. But at least you’ve learned a lot about the postwar era and what it means.
But meanwhile you’ve brought a guy on TV to deliver commentary on something he knows nothing about. Not only that, he doesn’t even know that he’s ignorant. Thinks if he talks louder and repeats “appease” often enough something magical will happen and a complex series of events will be reduced to one word.
And meanwhile there are people out there who do know, but nobody’s asking.
You’re not being paranoid, i do have a problem with the way history is being taught. I don’t know about teaching history backwards. I think it’s easier to understand todays events if you understand the past first. So it goes for learning history. But i see what you mean about by the time they get to the present it’s time to wrap things up for the year.
My problem with the way history is taught is the amount of time that is spent on it (not enough) and the things they gloss over and the things they choose to focus more attention on.
For one easy to recall example, when the kids were in grade school and middle school they were taught the same stuff every single February. For the whole month. Sure take time to explain what MLK did. But make it part in parcel in your teaching of the Civil Rights movement. Make Rosa Parks part of that too. But do it once, maybe in Middle School when they’re mature enough to get it. While they are spending the whole month of February repeating what they taught the kids last February, we just lost 12 months of our kids education that they could’ve learned something new.
I could go on and will about how they’ve brought in so many classes that they started calling “social studies” when we were in grade school. This took up the timeslots that were previously reserved for teaching history. My mom told me they didn’t teach “social studies” when she was in school. It was all history. OK, some of Social Studies is history but most of it isn’t. And that which is is questionable history in my opinion or propagandistic.
And don’t even get me started on the required reading in high school (or middle school for that matter, but particularly HS). Too late, i’m started. The kids deserve so much better than what they’re getting. They could be learning something, but instead they are being brainwashed with these “America-Bad” books. Is it good for our country’s future to have our future citizens and leaders hating their own country?
Is this too political? I considered ignoring your post to avoid going in that direction. But decided to answer you. You wondered if i had a problem with how history is being taught and these books are part of the problem i most certainly do have with it.
All this i mentioned and more is why you have people like the dude in the video who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. And he is college educated presumably and maybe even a graduate degree. This is not looking good looking forward.
I’m thinking of teaching history more like, Here’s Vladimir Putin and here’s his background. This is what Russia was like before him, this is how the breakup of the USSR went, here’s how the post-Stalin era differed from the Stalinist era, NATO and the Warsaw Pact, The Soviet experiencein WWII, the purges and Stalin’s paranoia, the post-WWI European national scene and the tensions within, here’s the revolution, here are the reasons for it. Start with where we are and step-by-step backwards explain the main threads of why it is what it is.
This isn’t totally coherent but I promise once somebody hires me to work it all out I’ll do a good job.
History is just a part of Social Studies. Kids need to learn how our system of government works, and while they’re at it a little sociology, anthropology, and religious studies (learning about religions not being indoctrinated) wouldn’t hurt.
Maybe an idea like yours should be tested. It certainly can’t be any worse than what’s going on right now. Your method might be more interesting to and more easily undestood by students. It should start in high school tho. Probably not middle school. Definitely not grade school. Kids too young may get confused. I think you’d need a good foundation of chronological history before this would work. You know, the basics, American Revolution, Civil War, Industrial Revolution, etc.
As for Social Studies, i know what it is. I only said that it took away hours of learning history. See, i don’t have a problem with learning anthropology or sociology, but those are not as important as history and can wait til middle school or high school. Of course they need to know civics in grade school.
To make room for history, how about getting rid of some of the other useless crap they call classes in Middle School and High School and focus more on history. See we’ve got kids that don’t know anything about history and social studies is the reason why.
And no, i’m not referring to music as one of the useless classes. Unfortunatley, they’ve already gotten rid of that. I learned a lot of songs in music class that my kids didn’t even learn because they didn’t have music class. I had to teach them those songs myself. I’m talking about classes like “Film” or “Womens Studies”. Here in CA they’re trying to bring back music, but not for the reason you might think. It’s because schools are closing and they need a reason to keep teachers employed. I hope they are successful in bringing back music. Art was taken away years ago, but it’s ok because they integrate that with other classes.
And learning about religion will not work in public school because it would be indoctrination; indoctrination of no religion at all or indoctrination of whatever the teachers beliefs are. Religion cannot be taught in school without some kind of personal bias. Honestly, i think that even in HS, most students are still not able to recognize bias. They’re still too immature, inexperienced and naive and unless they have a parent carefully watching what’s going on, that child could lose the faith that their family raised them with. Too long again. Oops.
We don’t have any space limits here at tom-mcgee.com, please go on as long as you need to to make your point!
I distinctly remember learning about world religions in fifth grade! But as far as I know none of us embraced Confucianism. If taught correctly learning about religions is no more likely to turn you into a buddhist than learning european history is to turn you into a bulgarian.
You said “schools are closing and they need a reason to keep teachers employed.” Can you expand on that a little?