Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
History wasn't color blind; color had a lot to do with historical events.
Now, if you mean that history should be taught without singling out any particular color, race, nationality, etc, I agree with that. The concern is that it isn't being taught that way. I don't know if that's true. I remember learning about black historical figures as well as white.
I remember learning about positive events as well as negative events. I am sure that there is more history about blacks in America that I could have learned but I am also sure that there is more history about whites (or Asians or Irish or Canadians) in America that I could have learned. I haven't attended a grade-school history class in a very long time so all I know is what I hear on the news and I've learned be skeptical of that.
|
If the teaching of history was color blind, we would not have learned about Rosa Parks. She is known BECAUSE she was a black activist. If she were a white activist, she wouldn't have become the tipping point of the Civil Rights Movement. If Martin Luther King, Jr. wasn't black, he wouldn't have been nearly as influential as he became - and probably wouldn't have been assassinated.
Many things have happened in this country -because- this or that person, group of people, church, school, child, was black.
How do you think the Civil War would've gone, if the slaves were all white Irish instead of black African?