True story. No teacher had bothered mentioning it yet. Up to that point I thought Stalin was one of the good guys for fighting against the evil Hitler. And then I realize that Stalin has more blood on his hands than Hitler.
I think my problem too is that I was crediting Stalin for the actions of his people. When in truth the Russians rallied together against their common foe in a way their leaders had not been able to unify them.
Our history classes are atrocious nowadays. Took european history in University, spent a full month of the semester talking about the african slave trade.. spent only about an hour talking about Napoleon. In total.
Gotta force the "apologetic" mentality on future generations. A generation of apologists will feel it is their turn to face oppression and that they deserve it because their ancestors was so horrible.
I realize that wrongs was done throughout history. But why emphasize so much on one thing while completely passing over another? The answer is obvious.
No wonder people today hate America so much. They are being taught to hate America. Of course it is an indoctrination and of course their hatred is indeed against America and not slavery. How many people do you think will believe me when I say slavery still exists today in certain Islamic countries? No, they would not care, they would just call me a racist and go on.
So slavery should be ignored in history class because it might trigger guilt in some people and hurt their delicate feelings, but they should teach about the current practice of it in Saudi Arabia - in history class?
When history classes teach about European or American slavery for a month and barely teach about other things I think they are trying to do more than teach about slavery.
No. I am not saying slavery in America shouldn't be taught. I am saying that if so much emphasis is to be put into slavery in and of itself there should also be lessons on slavery world wide. As well as the very real slavery in the world today.
If you are going to teach about the wrongs of slavery it should be note worthy as to mention it is still a problem. Failure to do so is turning a blind eye to the problem. In doing so one is no better than a passive bystander. Wouldn't you agree?
When universities spend a month teaching about the slave trade in Europe and an hour about other things. It is clearly trying to incite guilt or anger towards said country. Why else brood on a particular country's slave past for so long?
Slavery is slavery whether it's history be taught or it's present problem be taught. If one is against slavery they should be against slavery everywhere. Barking about America's past or Europe's past while turning a blind eye to modern slavery issues is not being against slavery.
And in saying that I am NOT saying America's past shouldn't be taught. But there is a difference with teaching and brooding over a subject for so long as to stir feelings about the subject.
So a class on European History should be teach about current events in Arabia?
More time on Napolean because, why? A week on Trafalgar then? Guy Fawkes? Queen Isabella? El Cid? Atilla? Khan?
Since we're expanding outside of Europe, how about Leopold or Rhodes in Africa? The Persian Famine of 1917 - 19, 8-10 million dead, half the country of 19 million, the country with the highest number of victims of WWII, and the largest genocide of the 20th Century? Starving while its own homegrown food was exported by Britain who also refused to allow food to be imported, even from the US. Ever heard of that one? India, 3 million dead in 1943 again because of the British war effort (because Brits love rice, so shipped that out), but this in WWII? 60 million dead Indians under UK rule over the centuries.
Yes, history is selective, because I never learned about a single one of those I listed in school.
A European history class should teach on more than just slavery. If said class teaches on only slavery for so long I will recognize it by what it teaches and not what it is apparently misnamed. I will see it as a class that teaches about the atrocities of slavery. And yes I expect a professor that opposed to slavery to at least mention that it is still around today. Don't have to make a full course about it but at least mention it.
There is a world of history I don't know squat about. And of the small percentage I do know of I probably only know the bare briefings of it.
I have learned nearly as much from the band Sabaton as I have in some WW2 classes. I am surprised that throughout all my WW2 classes the Battle of Wizna was not even mentioned. People think Poland sent cavalry to fight German tanks and other than that not much is said about Poland.
That's a fair point, I suppose, but then making comprisons to modern equivalents can lead to endless tangents. Besides that, going outside of Europe to mention what is happening now, what about what happened then in other areas? The role of Muslims in the slave trade is often overlooked or minimized. They were selling Africans before Europeans got into the slave trade. In fact, if you look throughout Africa and Asia, Islamic populations are found in ports of trade and along slave routes. That's because while trading, Arabs would kidnap non Moslems since the koran permits them to. People caught wind that conversion was protection against this, so that's why you see these populations today, and why they are Sunni (if Islam radiated outwards over time, they would mostly be Shiite instead of Sunni throughout the Indian subcontinent, as that area abutted Shiite Iran).
With the way some youth of today thinks I doubt they would believe that anyone else had slaves. Let alone that those countries had slaves before and still after America or Europe.
I did not know that was why so many converted to islam. Is it slavery that made the ancient Islamic empire as powerful as it was back in the day? I do not know where Islam first began but they had quite the empire at one time. Expanding across North Africa and into Spain.
Their main power was around the time the Vikings was going full force I think. The TV series Vikings does have some historical inaccuracies but it does talk about the vastness of their empire. Unless I am getting it mixed up with Byzantine...
You are correct to mention what has happened in other areas. I had history classes that wasn't restricted to one particular place. And no matter how long they dwell on the slavery subject not once was anything said about what you mentioned.
But like with my original meme. I spent several days learning about the Holocaust and how bad Hitler was. Yet I was first made aware of Stalin's atrocities by a student. Why? The Holocaust is bad no doubt but why does it get singled out so much and other atrocities are not even mentioned? And why was it not mentioned that Hitler took steps to disarm the countries he took over?
I used to question why didn't the Jews fight back. After the Crystal Night they had to know this new Nazi party had nothing good in store for them. Perhaps their countries didn't allow the owning of guns? If so why not mention that?
It's because it will show the undeniable importance of the Second Amendment!
Why wasn't I taught that despite the horrors of the Holocaust a few hundred Jews managed to fight back at the Warsaw Ghetto?
Or that Yugoslavia managed to liberate itself?
Or why didn't Hitler invade Switzerland?
Or why didn't the Japs invade us instead of just attacking Pearl Harbor?
Maybe all of that is not taught because it shows the importance of the Second Amendment. The Jews fought back with guns. Obviously Yugoslavia did as well. Turns out Switzerland has a law requiring one to own guns. And the Japanese commander said "We would be met with a rifle behind every blade of grass".
It is one thing to fight another country's army and another to fight an entire country's populace.
They converted because there was very little choice. After the rise of Mohammed, Islam started to spread across africa and the middle east violently. Conquered people were force to either convert or pay a tax called the jizya to their Muslim overlords, and other religions were often persecuted. They converted because they had very little choice in the matter. Convert, be a 2nd class citizen, or die.. pretty much the only 3 choices.
The timeline of vikings is not quite the height of their power, but it isn't long after. Just prior to the vikings timeline(as far as I can estimate it since vikings has multiple characters from different time periods) was the the reign of Charlemagne. His grandfather is the one who basically stopped the tide, at the Battle of Tours in 732. A muslim warlord, fresh from his conquest of Spain had invaded France and was defeated and turned back by Charles the Hammer.
But yes, I agree. Schools are VERY picky about what they teach in order to get across the specific message they want their students to learn.
I still say the schools system is intentionally being picky and choosy about what they teach for the reasons of indoctrination.
But with the way they try so hard to make America look bad with slavery I am surprised they do not mention what you said earlier..? About the famine. Perhaps they are nowadays. I don't know.
Perhaps they want to make people disgruntled with America but not so die hard against it as to demand anarchy. Yeah I know I am going to sound like a tin foil hat conspiracy crier. But when you break away from what the mainstream media tells you, start asking questions for yourself, finding answers, and asking more questions. You are left wondering why things are being done the way they are.
Why are today's youth, who are living a privileged life attending prestigious colleges, blatantly disrespecting Veterans on Veterans Day and stomping / throwing away flags put up in their honor? Why after so many atrocities committed by armed troops against unarmed populations are people still denying the importance of the Second Amendment?
In my opinion they are defying logic with their thoughts and actions so I believe it is the result of indoctrination. Possibly mind control. And you don't need some magical gizmo to take over one's mind. All you have to do is direct their emotions to suit your ends. What the media constantly projects and what schools teach is more than sufficient to do so especially when coupled with social media.
I actually don't know which country slavery is most dominant in. It has been a year or so ago when I read an article saying something about castrated African boys being sold as slaves.
Needless to say I was shocked. I did not realize such things still existed because no one bothered to mention it.
I think he is trying to draw attention as to why isn't Stalin's atrocities, among others, mentioned in history classes.
Just about every year in high school I was taught about the holocaust. One year we did a long session over the holocaust in English class. English!
Yet the only way I found out what Stalin did was by a fellow classmate telling me about it.
I do not believe the maker of this meme is saying Hitler wasn't evil. But rather he is saying that a lot more atrocities have happened and they don't even get mentioned.
And yes, Stalin did kill a lot more of his people than Hitler did with the Holocaust. But history classes don't teach that so it is going to seem unbelievable at first.