What Japanese history lessons leave out - a BBC article

[Oberon]

A while ago we had a conversation on here about how the Second World War is taught in German and Japanese schools. Whilst we had a good overview of the German system, it was a bit harder to get one of the Japanese.
Here's an article on the Japanese history cirriculum and how it differs to other nations:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21226068

Personally I do worry a lot about Japanese history education, that the nation is breeding a generation of people who do not understand why Japans neighbours are so sore about how they were treated by the Japanese in the war, and that may in turn lead to raised tensions and aggression.

[Stealhead]

Interesting article.

Thing is most every nation tells its "clean" version of history.

[Oberon]

This is true, when I went through the education system in the UK there was scant mention of Mers-el-Kébir.

[Sailor Steve]

None of us learns any of the bad stuff in school. The difference is that in most western countries you stumble across it sooner or later. You don't have to go to another country before it's even mentioned.

Fascinating article, Jamie. Thanks for the link.

This is true, when I went through the education system in the UK there was scant mention of Mers-el-Kébir.

But did they teach about the foul frenchies launching air raids against Gibralter?

[Platapus]

Thanks for posting that article. Most interesting to see history from a different viewpoint.

And yeah, every nation cherry picks and sugar coats their own history. I guess you can't have the younglings learn the real history of their country until they are older.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Oberon

This is true, when I went through the education system in the UK there was scant mention of Mers-el-Kébir.

In the U.S we dont spend a terrible amount of time on WW2, we spend, in total, maybe a month covering it, and that is spread out over something around 3-4 history classes (8th grade history, World history, and U.S history for me is when i covered world war two) that essentially teach the exact same thing. For instance, World History teaches the same things, and for the same amount of time, when covering WW2 as U.S history does. i took a WW2 class as an elective, it was horribly easy and i barely learned anything new, except for some interesting little facts here and there, such as how the russians would teach dogs to get their food/reward from underneath tanks, then strap them with explosives and send them at the germans.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Thanks for posting that article. Most interesting to see history from a different viewpoint.

And yeah, every nation cherry picks and sugar coats their own history. I guess you can't have the younglings learn the real history of their country until they are older.

Even then history involves much interpretation you can look at any event from many different views and ones views (nationalistic,liberal,conservative,crazy) also is a factor.

@CaptainMattJ I learned about the tank killing dogs on my own while I was in school.Of course the problem with a tank killing dog is it only works once then the enemy shoots every dog that they see just in case it might be a bomb dog.I also heard that the dogs did not know what tank to attack of course so they where just as likely to run under a Soviet tank as a German tank.

Don't let your schooling get in the way of your education if you are a human that is.For the dogs better to use them as guards than bombs.

[Platapus]

But by gum we sure do cover the civil war.

In US schools, American history consists of

Stuff that happened a long time ago
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Revolutionary war (which we won, single handedly, all by ourselves)
nothing happens
nothing happens
CIVIL WAR (which we won single handedly against our selves)
CIVIL WAR
CIVIL WAR
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Industrial revolution (but which one is not clear or what happened, just that the US was the bestest)
Nothing happens
WWI (just that we won it... single handedly..all by ourselves)
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Great depression but not really getting into how or what really happened
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Out of the clear, suddenly with no warning WWII (which really started in 1941) which we did win single handedly all by ourselves
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
time to graduate.

That's history in public schools when I went through. So glad I cultivated an independent interest in history as a grub.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Platapus

But by gum we sure do cover the civil war.

In US schools, American history consists of

Stuff that happened a long time ago
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Revolutionary war (which we won, single handedly, all by ourselves)
nothing happens
nothing happens
CIVIL WAR (which we won single handedly against our selves)
CIVIL WAR
CIVIL WAR
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Industrial revolution (but which one is not clear or what happened, just that the US was the bestest)
Nothing happens
WWI (just that we won it... single handedly..all by ourselves)
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Great depression but not really getting into how or what really happened
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
Out of the clear, suddenly with no warning WWII (which really started in 1941) which we did win single handedly all by ourselves
Nothing happens
Nothing happens
time to graduate.

That's history in public schools when I went through. So glad I cultivated an independent interest in history as a grub.

i dont know how long ago you went through but this is horribly inaccurate now, students now, in U.S history at least, learn about everything. They learn about the colonial period, and all of my teachers have highlighted the fact that the americans blew the problem out of proportion in the revolutionary war, and of how france was one of the biggest reasons we came out on top.

We covered the years after, then the war of 1812, the great expansion into the west, The industrial revolution and the smaller wars in the latter half of the 1800s, such as the mexican-american war and spanish american wars, to WW1, the 1920s, the depression, WW2, 50s, Vietnam and the cold war, 80s, and the gulf war. And all without the ultra-nationalist Go-america attitudes either, it was more neutral than you claim it was. That was my experience, and its pretty dam recent too.

In World History its pretty broad and neutral too, i was surprised how my world history teacher dealt with the russian revolution and the times after, she didn't just recite the anti-communist tirade, she taught about all aspects of communism. We covered 1700s imperialism, napoleon, the russian revolution, ww1 and 2, the franco-prussian war, the chinese civil war, a whole broad range of subjects. Thought to be honest, that teacher was the worst one i ever had, not in terms of her teaching skills but of her as a person. Horribly sexist and constantly infuriated with us, especially men, and i'm not even blowing that out of proportion either. She spent 10 minutes out of a period one time grilling this student who arrived late frequently, ten minutes out of the period for something so mundane and unimportant to the rest of us. A good teacher but a horrible person.

Uh hun. And just how much about the Wars in and around Ohio did you get some teachin on?

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

i dont know how long ago you went through but this is horribly inaccurate now, students now, in U.S history at least, learn about everything. They learn about the colonial period, and all of my teachers have highlighted the fact that the americans blew the problem out of proportion in the revolutionary war, and of how france was one of the biggest reasons we came out on top.

We covered the years after, then the war of 1812, the great expansion into the west, The industrial revolution and the smaller wars in the latter half of the 1800s, such as the mexican-american war and spanish american wars, to WW1, the 1920s, the depression, WW2, 50s, Vietnam and the cold war, 80s, and the gulf war. And all without the ultra-nationalist Go-america attitudes either, it was more neutral than you claim it was. That was my experience, and its pretty dam recent too.

While I do agree that Platapus' post was oversimplified and not entirely accurate, I will say as a matter of fact that most survey courses in US history do end along the lines of "and we won the Second World War and everyone rode off into the sunset and lived happily ever after."

I agree with ^

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

None of us learns any of the bad stuff in school

Yet I wrote a paper and did a presentation about the Bataan death march in 5th grade.

Important lessons for mankind to learn

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

I remember when my history class got to WW2 in aroun Jr High/Middle school, and I really didn't learn anything that I didn't already know since I started reading about WW2 way back in the 5th or 6th grade mainly cause I got fed up with "America this, America that, America does everything."

Also Platapus makes a good point, here in the good 'ol US of A we're taught that we won every war we've ever fought without any help from anyone, however not everyone is taught that way it greatly depends on the teacher and the history books that are supplied to the schools too.