I am watching a ww2 flick (the winds of war) and Wake island is mentioned multiple times. Because Wally chose Wake Island to write about I was wondering what was the type/tone of history taught during the beaver years.

My mother told me that when her 8th grade textbook of Official History of Virginia back in the 1940's started with the settlement of Jamestown in 1607 and ended with General Lee's Surrender at Appomattox Court House in 1865- with NOTHING happening thereafter.

No Reconstruction, Panic of 1893, No WWI, No Depression,etc.

IOW, it wasn't unheard of for them to leave out a lot of stuff not so easily discussed.

There are many episodes they mention of Indians being killed ... now a days the word Indian is practically banned

Not a peep about the Nazi's ? How about Pearl Harbor ? Even the Un Civil War ?

I went to High School in the 60-70's and never heard of Auschwitz until college

So Wally and the Beav might have not even heard of Wake Island when they were in school? Hmm...

Maybe just from Ward's stories. IIRC Wally used Wake Island because he couldn't spell Guadalcanal.

I went to school around the time of Beaver, and I don't remember when they "cut off" history in high school. I never asked my mother and she would have been in high school in the 1930s. I know a lady who is 85 and I'll ask her.

Kids back then were voracious readers. Our town, and grade school had very good libraries. Reading about history wasn't a chore, but very enjoyable.

Kids back then were voracious readers. Our town, and grade school had very good libraries. Reading about history wasn't a chore, but very enjoyable.

Oh, I agree but alas many of the official textbooks (in weeding out historical entities' shadow sides) often wound up being dry, bland and lifeless.

The KEY back then and now is to read the ORIGINAL sources found in libraries (or, if one has no access, a Website that has a link to a valid hard copy of said original source).

History is recorded by the victors +- lol

I remember history, geography, and social studies being canned in a very Pro Euro/manifest destiny frame of reference. Almost no mention of treaty betrayals, or the USA's almost total disregard for the Treaty of Ghent stipulations specific to the native Americans. Almost no mention of the buffalo slaughter(s), and a very stilted, xenophobic treatment of the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo (and it's outfall)

I did have a black social studies teacher in 1972 who really went above and beyond the call of duty to make up for deficiencies in my prior teacher's coverage of the civil war and peripheral issues. Had Crispus Attucks and Dred Scott coming out our ears....

Also had an 8th grade science teacher who assured us that people concerned about noxious emissions of coal fired generating plants, were all misguided fools, since coal combustion by-products were all organic.....
Wonder if teachers can be sued for malpractice?

I also recall being spoon fed a very Israel-centric perspective on the middle east conflict.

And, of course, if I just stayed in school and hated communism at every available opportunity, I was sure to bask in the American dream. However....within 7 years of graduating highschool, the term "rust belt" entered the public vocabulary. I never opted for factory work, but my friends who did all eventually regretted it. The American Dream...sounds nice, doesn't it?

American Dream ?
Some may argue that the ills of the US came more from the Robber Barons and their Corp monopolies, and the influence they wielded to criminal politicians ... and the average working stiffs were just doing their best to survive +-

Maybe that too much of a generalization ?

One thing for sure is the historical records are biased.

As a kid, I was an avid short wave radio listener. And was fascinated by the different spin put on news stories by stations such as Radio Havana, Radio Moscow, and Radio Bejing,...compared to the way Walter Cronkite presented the very same stories.

Yeah I knew what "propaganda" was, but had been brainwashed to believe it was something only the "other" guys did.

And, of course the version we heard from Walter was the version getting written into history books, so that "proved" it must be the truth, right? lol.

Except I also noticed that often the news stories on BBC world services, and other allied interests strayed from Walter's preferred version, as well.

And then there was the "little golden books" version of each day's events, Voice of America.

I remember seeing the late comedian/social commentator George Carlin in concert at the Park Theater in Union City, NJ in 1988. During the show, Mr. Carlin opined on the oppressive history of the European peoples:

“It’s those blue eyes of the European people,” George Carlin exclaimed, pointing to his own blue eyes. “The Europeans came to the New World to take away the land from the Red man, and then brought over the Black man from Africa in slave ships in order to work the land. And then the White man took away the land from the Brown man in Texas and California, so that he could fly a plane across the Pacific and drop atomic bombs on the Yellow man in Japan. It’s those blue eyes, that start all the trouble, I tell you, those blue eyes!”

Somehow, this was not the European and American history that Sister Cordes taught myself and my young classmates in grade school many years ago.

LOL - check out the TV casts from the 50's 60's even into the 70's - old blue eyes dominate !

Yes, that’s quite true! Although, I guess it wasn’t until “Still the Beaver” aired in 1983 (?), that we finally got to see if June and the boys, along with Eddie, Lumpy, Larry, Fred, etc., did have eyes of blue or not.

“It’s those blue eyes of the European people,” George Carlin exclaimed, pointing to his own blue eyes. “The Europeans came to the New World to take away the land from the Red man, and then brought over the Black man from Africa in slave ships in order to work the land. And then the White man took away the land from the Brown man in Texas and California, so that he could fly a plane across the Pacific and drop atomic bombs on the Yellow man in Japan. It’s those blue eyes, that start all the trouble, I tell you, those blue eyes!”



There is a lot wrong with his speech, but hey, good thing for him for those blue eyes. Ireland would never have been so kind and given him the money or career.

I believe too, that perspective is key. In the environment that colonial era British explorers grew up, the idea of "ownership" was paramount (the king's land, forest, & riches, etc)

Many immigrants to colonial USA were trying to escape such totalitarian control, yet they brought the same bad habits with them. Many of the native Americans believed they belonged to the land, so the euro concept of land belonging to people, took some getting used to.

And, I believe the British exported similar philosophy everywhere they extended their empire.

You hear about British explorers discovering the source of the Nile river, and it always made me wonder "if the Africans were there for tens of thousands of years previous, why did they never discover the source of the Nile?

I believe the answer is one of priority. It never really seemed important, to them. But with the British imperative to "own" everything, the source of all that water was a valuable asset to be identified. I.E. MY land, MY river, MY water...etc

Imperial thinking in other words..."master of all that he surveys"...

And, that mentality wrote our history books.

^^^
There is a 2 season program about orphans in 1800's England. They worked/lived at a fabric mill along with some of the townspeople.

The mill workers wanted to go on strike against the mill. The powers that be put up flyers in the town reminding them that the wildlife they wanted to live on during the strike belonged to the King. That ended the full-fledged strike.

I discover things all the time. They have been around forever, but I just discovered them myself. I have always taken that discovered thing with a grain of salt.

Interesting that neither the red man nor the brown man built the big ships, stored food, navigated the stars, and discovered Europe. The Americas had everything that they needed to do so, yet, there they sat without cupboards for their microscopes or even the wheel.

Interesting that neither the red man nor the brown man built the big ships, stored food, navigated the stars, and discovered Europe. The Americas had everything that they needed to do so, yet, there they sat without cupboards for their microscopes or even the wheel.

A really good book on that subject is Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel"

In an overly condensed nutshell, he posits that as the great migration out of Africa transpired, people reached the mid east, and turned either left (west) or right (east).

Those who turned left eventually encountered the Atlantic ocean, and were "bottled up" by the barrier, giving them thousands of years to develop technology, weapons, steel screws to hold ocean worthy ships together, and germ exposure/immunity due to raised population density.

Those who turned east, in contrast, consumed their time and resources supporting the constant movement, east, through the bearing strait, and into the Americas.

I guess what he's saying is that a rolling stone gathers no advanced knowledge?

But, familiarity breeds contempt, eventually those bottled up euros grew so sick of one another, that they used their advanced knowledge to make an escape, bringing their weapons and diseases with them.

There is a WHOLE LOT more to the book, I just gave you the dimestore cliff notes version. :)

It is also worthwhile to ponder the european migration to the americas in context with the ultimate failure of the Crusades.

Sort of a "well, they are kicking our *** in the east, so maybe we should head west?" type thing. (fwiw)

Those who turned left eventually encountered the Atlantic ocean, and were "bottled up" by the barrier, giving them thousands of years to develop technology, weapons, steel screws to hold ocean worthy ships together, and germ exposure/immunity due to raised population density.

Those who turned east, in contrast, consumed their time and resources supporting the constant movement, east, through the bearing strait, and into the Americas.


Random Superficial Post 971
So once they were in the America's they had the same opportunity to be bottled up and develop things, yet there they sat.

So once they were in the America's they had the same opportunity to be bottled up and develop things, yet there they sat.

If you are truly interested, you might consider reading the book, most libraries have a copy,

I've just given a bare bones recap. The book is almost 500 pages and goes into considerable detail.

Not that I am 100% on board with everything he says, but the book gives needed perspective to many issues.

His claims are that people were settled in europe thousands of years before the american indians were localized in their ultimate destination, and because land was abundant, could afford to move on to other locations once local resources were depleted.

In Europe, there was a greater likelihood that someone else would already be occupying the space "next door", and so simply moving to greener pastures was less an option for them. Unless they were willing to fight for it (the "guns" aspect from the book title)

Random post 975
I have never thought being nomadic was a sign of intelligence. You have to sit still to make the good stuff. You have to have a support system for the highly intelligent to come up with things while the others supply the food, clothing, and housing.

I have a smidge of Gypsy in me and they are not known to be rocket scientists. Kept moving around...

Back to his main premise,..the euros hit the barrier, and have no choice but to set, and hone their skills, learning to either get along with one another, or go to war to press your will upon your adversary. And necessity being the mother of invention, trying different things to gain a leg up on your enemy, facilitated certain advancements in technology. Europe became a crucible of invention.

Compare that to the people walking across the huge spanse of Asia, you can always vector off to avoid a conflict, wander in a different direction.

Until they get to the pacific ocean, then they have traveled their "limit" and start settling down to create what became china,...and advances followed.

Until one day conflict splinters off a banished wave that heads north, across the bearing sea, and into the Americas.

Even a group earlier that turned south into the peninsula of India, once they reached the fullest extent of where they could travel, they meet the sea, are forced to hunker down, and then advances in culture, science, etc follow.

So, it's a common theme, those who keep moving don't have the time and opportunity to develop sophisticated skills.

They are too busy meeting the challenges of the new environments they continue to find.

Now, Diamond certainly has his critics, there are people convinced that he's full of it.
But, his theories make sense to me, so I accept then until someone else makes a more convincing argument.

I don't buy the argument that the british were created to rule the planet. (as they seemed to have at one time believed)

Random post 977
Too simplistic for me. There is more to it than one group went left and one went right. Kind of like the Donner Party. We know how that worked out.

It's been 20+ years since I read that book, not even sure where my copy is these days, so...I'd have to speculate that I think he was intentionally painting with a broad brush.
In context with his theory AS WELL AS with the base premise of your thread, I think it's important to keep in mind that the history that is taught is framed by the priorities in vogue among the people and at the time of the teaching. And, that is subject to change as time goes along.

Think of the TV shows we now see that are preceded with a disclaimer that the program's content might include outdated cultural references, and such. History books are not immune to culturally driven revisionism, either. It's not that the facts change so much as the way we are willing to accept them changes.

Jared Diamond is a liberal, the story he was trying to tell when he wrote that book was that white euro peoples and their culture WERE NOT inherently superior, but instead their onetime dominance of the planet was a result of fate and happenstance. In many ways I feel that he made his point.

But there are some areas where I feel he missed his mark.

A lot of debate we hear frequently centers upon whether "facts" are rooted in science, or merely anecdotal observations. And I think there is a problem where once an authority gets a certain amount of letters after their name,....they get full of themselves and fudge their findings anecdotally, in the name of what they see as "science". Who would dare dispute the pre-eminent expert? etc

Diamond was using an example of how primitive New Zealanders coped with external influences, and tried to extrapolate that to how other cultures MUST NECESSARILY have dealt with similar situations. And I recall being troubled with that generalization.

Just because one gets a certain reaction in a test tube, is not proof the whole of reality must necessarily follow suit. He and many others I feel have grown overly confident with their anecdotal observation.

But as I mentioned, he had an agenda. So he had motivation to goose his results.

I think too, that the history taught is the product of what "cultural directors" decide they want young minds to be programmed with....what "our people" are supposed to believe and hold dear.....for the good of the republic...more so than what 'comprehensive' truth might otherwise dictate.

A lot of our local history here was skipped over in our schools curriculum ( as taught in 1950s and 60s) to create a veneered truth that validates our ethos....a lot of what was left out actually defines why we are here, and why "here" is significant.

Took me until my late 40s conducting independent research to discover the real DNA of my childhood home.

And I doubt my area is unique in that regard.

There has been a lot of angst in this country's past over who determines content of school books, I guess that's because whatever you can raise a generation to believe, defines their reality?

Today with all the revised Anti-American history being shoved down today's young skulls full of mush's throats not even Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson are mentioned. Or if they are our brave and brilliant forefathers are maligned and denigrated. Today's youth are taught to hate their country and each other to be divided by race, creed and color. THE EXACT OPPOSITE of how we were taught and EXACTLY what should be taught again today. Teaching citizens of a country that they should hate their country and each other is how you divide a country and is how a country goes down fast. The evil communists of the world like George Soros and China are very happy with the results of their orchestrated handiwork in all of this. Teachers unions have been taken over, colleges are filled with communist professors and even our once free elections have been rigged using computer technology and good old fashioned phony ballot stuffing.

Beware and be warned of our future as a once free country if this is allowed to continue. United we stand, divided we fall, and don't think this hasn't occurred to the commies.

Today with all the revised Anti-American history being shoved down today's young skulls full of mush's throats not even Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson are mentioned. Or if they are our brave and brilliant forefathers are maligned and denigrated. Today's youth are taught to hate their country and each other to be divided by race, creed and color. THE EXACT OPPOSITE of how we were taught and EXACTLY what should be taught again today. Teaching citizens of a country that they should hate their country and each other is how you divide a country and is how a country goes down fast. The evil communists of the world like George Soros and China are very happy with the results of their orchestrated handiwork in all of this. Teachers unions have been taken over, colleges are filled with communist professors and even our once free elections have been rigged using computer technology and good old fashioned phony ballot stuffing.

Beware and be warned of our future as a once free country if this is allowed to continue. United we stand, divided we fall, and don't think this hasn't occurred to the commies.

Bravo!

Bravo!

warning
political content present
posted as food for thought related to prior posts
please don't shoot the messenger
I'm open to discussion here or elsewhere


These 2 videos are all encompassing regarding our global situation.
Each runs about one hour, 2 different approaches with the agenda clearly exposed.

TELL ALL - Catherine Austin Fitts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GauxvkhFDSA
Who’s pulling the strings? The Monopoly behind the insanity…
https://vrevealed.com/c19/monopoly

Today with all the revised Anti-American history being shoved down today's young skulls

I don't disagree with a thing that you say, but it;'s also pretty evident that the historic official source has had their thumb on the scale as well. So it's pretty hard to declare "foul" without including Uncle Sam in the blame pool.

One thing I take particular exception to is behavior and activities we decry as bad actions when committed by our adversaries, yet forgivable and unavoidable when we are the perp.

After one sees the same pattern play out over and over again, you start to realize it's just part of the script. Perhaps one of the true curses of old age? :)