Well, my teacher (Belgium, Europe) focused almost only on European history and only touched american history when they did something in Europe; WW2, Cold war etc... We did had big discussions about the Vietnam & Iraq war.

Not really interested in the history of the us either since you guys didn't had medieval times.

I like swords...

War of 1812 is pretty important to Canadian History, and it's not difficult to see why. Canada hasn't been a military power in 50 years, and it still gives a certain sect of our population pride knowing "we" (by which we mean British Colonists that would one day be Canadians) burned down the white house and won a land war in the United States. Obviously with a rather sparse military history, knowing that we defeated a world super-power in it's infancy is pretty cool.

That being said, I understand some American schools teach that America won that war because they got Maine. Even though Thomas Jefferson was publicly humiliated for saying that conquering the northern colonies would be a "Matter of marching", we burned the white house the ground and had ground troops as far south as New Orleans. Really? The fact that you moved the border a few miles makes that a win?

Of course, having never attended an American school, they might not actually teach that. Also, Canadians might take credit for it, but without the support of the British Navy it never would have happened.

And England ignoring that war makes a lot of sense. A British history lesson has about what.. 400 wars to cover? Canada has 5. The US, counting police actions has like 50.

EDIT - Oh yeah, I forgot that the other reason we feel pride about that war, is because we didn't start it and we ended it when we "won". I think Canadians, more than anything else, are proud of our "peaceful nature" in comparison to our southern neighbors. Whether that reputation is earned is a matter of debate though.

Scotland focused a lot on WW2 when it came to history. Looked at the German side of the front for a month or two, just so we understood how and why they went to war. Learn past economy, surprisingly very little time is focussed on past monarchy.

Imitation Saccharin :

We learned MacDonald was a drunk >.<

Which MacDonald? Ronald? I always thought that clown was a child molester m'self.

On the serious side, I find it funny that I know more of, and more about the American presidents than the Canadian prime ministers. I know we've had a native American one once, didn't last long. Know we've had a woman once, didn't last long. And I know Mulrooney (sp?) is the biggest fuck-up of recent times, or was till Stephen Hitler came to power. Aside from that, I really couldn't tell you much of historic or even recent-past Canadian PM's. Cretien I knew semi-personally, but couldn't even name any of the others.

Now I know more about Regan, Carter, Ford, Lincoln, Washington, Roosevelt, Bush, Worse Bush, Clinton, and/or Kennedy individually, than I know about all Canadian PM's combined.

How's that for irony.

Khell_Sennet:

Imitation Saccharin :

We learned MacDonald was a drunk >.<

Which MacDonald? Ronald? I always thought that clown was a child molester m'self.

On the serious side, I find it funny that I know more of, and more about the American presidents than the Canadian prime ministers. I know we've had a native American one once, didn't last long. Know we've had a woman once, didn't last long. And I know Mulrooney (sp?) is the biggest fuck-up of recent times, or was till Stephen Hitler came to power. Aside from that, I really couldn't tell you much of historic or even recent-past Canadian PM's. Cretien I knew semi-personally, but couldn't even name any of the others.

Now I know more about Regan, Carter, Ford, Lincoln, Washington, Roosevelt, Bush, Worse Bush, Clinton, and/or Kennedy individually, than I know about all Canadian PM's combined.

How's that for irony.

Not ironic at all. No offense to Canadians, but those men have all had a much larger role in world politics and history. Belgium probably isn't a bad country with a bad system, but name one of their leaders... ever.

Crunchy English:
War of 1812 is pretty important to Canadian History, and it's not difficult to see why. Canada hasn't been a military power in 50 years, and it still gives a certain sect of our population pride knowing "we" (by which we mean British Colonists that would one day be Canadians) burned down the white house and won a land war in the United States. Obviously with a rather sparse military history, knowing that we defeated a world super-power in it's infancy is pretty cool.

That being said, I understand some American schools teach that America won that war because they got Maine. Even though Thomas Jefferson was publicly humiliated for saying that conquering the northern colonies would be a "Matter of marching", we burned the white house the ground and had ground troops as far south as New Orleans. Really? The fact that you moved the border a few miles makes that a win?

Of course, having never attended an American school, they might not actually teach that. Also, Canadians might take credit for it, but without the support of the British Navy it never would have happened.

And England ignoring that war makes a lot of sense. A British history lesson has about what.. 400 wars to cover? Canada has 5. The US, counting police actions has like 50.

EDIT - Oh yeah, I forgot that the other reason we feel pride about that war, is because we didn't start it and we ended it when we "won". I think Canadians, more than anything else, are proud of our "peaceful nature" in comparison to our southern neighbors. Whether that reputation is earned is a matter of debate though.

We aren't taught that we won, we're just taught that we talked to the British and they finally got it through their heads that they longer owned us. We won the Battle of New Orleans, but that didn't do shit because we were already at peace.

P.S. I thought that the British forces that burned down Washington had sailed from somewhere in the Carribean, not Canada.

Well, if I remember my history from age 5-13 here in Brtiain, we start off with the Saxons and the Romans. then some stuff on the Ancient Egyptians. then the English civil war then the industrial revolution for a good while, bit of the French revolution. then we start the WW's at the GCSE level. typically dealing more with Hitler's rise to power his motives, the Russian's role and a lot more social aspects of it. don't do too much on America apart from you supplying our women with nylon stockings and pineapple chunks.

We don't do at all much on American history becaus quite frankly it's very boring and a lot of it is lies.
I know in America the first 8 years of history you are spent being force fed hyperbole about Washington telling his father he cut down his cherry tree and his father telling him "run to my arms; glad am I, George, that you killed my tree; for you have paid me for it a thousand fold. Such an act of heroism in my son, is more worth than a thousand trees, though blossomed with silver, and their fruits of purest gold." and it's actually a load of bollocks, then you learn all the battles during the civil war that took place during the American Civil war in the local area/state.

Here in sweden our books are not filled with american history, as you wrote in your OP, so we dont learn about the conflict in 1812 nor the battle for new orleans, we learn about our own countries wars and the general history of the world.

Why would we in sweden delve into american history?, i mean seriously?

zirnitra:

I know in America the first 8 years of history you are spent being force fed hyperbole about Washington telling his father he cut down his cherry tree and his father telling him "run to my arms; glad am I, George, that you killed my tree; for you have paid me for it a thousand fold. Such an act of heroism in my son, is more worth than a thousand trees, though blossomed with silver, and their fruits of purest gold." and it's actually a load of bollocks. and all the battles during the civil war that took place during the American Civil war in the local area/state.

No one accepts that as fact. They also teach us a lot of nonsense about Columbus and Thanksgiving that we learn shortly thereafter are cutesy lies taught by elementary schoolteachers. You get a much better set of facts in secondary schools.

You're right, US history is damned boring. Because there's not very much of it. It's short, and it's a steep rise to power. Like Tony Montana. I just hope we don't get wasted in the end like he did :)

For the record most history classes in the US start off with Egypt, then Greece and Rome, then the dark ages, the crusades, the enlightenment/renaissance eras, then we get more focused on the US after the revolution. It's a pretty broad spectrum, it just doesn't go to deep in things non-american.

I for one wish they taught us more about African/Indian (the country)/Asian history. Those are 3 seriously neglected topics. You probably learn more about India if you're in the UK because it was part of the empire for a long time. Probably 20th century China as well.

But I'd bet all my marbles you don't learn much about those places that took place before you're ancestors showed up there.

zirnitra:
then the English civil war

I for one think they should teach US children a lot more about Cromwell. His philosophy was very similar to the American Revolution.

poleboy:
I've only received basic history lessons (10-12 years combined), but I found most of the textbooks to be quite unbiased. And in the later years (college level, I assume), much emphasis was put on secondary sources and the general validity of such. We did spend a lot of time on WW2, but I think this was mostly because our teacher knew that bit well, and liked to teach it.

Me too.

Ixus Illwrath:
Not ironic at all. No offense to Canadians, but those men have all had a much larger role in world politics and history. Belgium probably isn't a bad country with a bad system, but name one of their leaders... ever.

Yves Leterme is the current one, goes by the title Prime Minister I believe. Looks like a cross between Harrison Ford and John Malcovich... But yes, I get your point.

The funny thing is, and it pains me to say this, that Jean Cretien is perhaps the best leader this country has ever had. As much as I very much hate him, he managed ten full years in office without doing any damage to the country, succeeded in marginally reducing our debt and taxes, and him being on the throne kept idiots like Steven Hitler and that fucker Gilles Duceppe off the big-boy chair.

I attribute Jean's success to the fact he's a gimpy-faced francophone. Us English Canadians can't understand a gods damned thing he says, and I presume it's not much easier for the French Canadians, so how much damage can he do? Also, that he's known to beat the shit out of people who attack him, rather than hide behind the CIA, wins some points.

One of my Russian friends asked me, in all seriousness, "What did England/America do during World War 2?"

In her knowledge, WW2 was the Russians holding off the Germans.

Beowulf DW:
I was talking about this with my dad one time, and it struck me as a topic worth delving into.

How do countries like Denmark, Sweden, or Switzerland write their history textbooks? You can tell a lot about how people from a country view history and the world at large by looking at their history classes and such.

For instance, textbooks here in the U.S.A. give a whole chapter to the Conflict of 1812 and the Battle of New Orleans, however, I'm given to understand that British textbooks devote maybe a paragraph to the same event. And obviously the Japanese treatment of WWII is radically different from that of, say, Australia.

So my question is this: How do other countries (the ones that have remained "neutral" such as Switzerland and, oh, I don't know...Iceland?) write their history texts. How do they view events like World War Two, the Cold War and other such things?

Does anyone know?

Look at your topic title. That is the problem with American education right there.

Edit: That sounded harsher than I meant to be. What I meant is that the American education system is very limited in terms of international scope. Especially when it comes to history.

The_root_of_all_evil:
One of my Russian friends asked me, in all seriousness, "What did England/America do during World War 2?"

In her knowledge, WW2 was the Russians holding off the Germans.

Their conflict was very different than ours during that war. Their side is fairly under-represented in our history classes as well.

I could easily picture an American kid asking a Russian exchange student the same question.

Beowulf DW:
I was talking about this with my dad one time, and it struck me as a topic worth delving into.

How do countries like Denmark, Sweden, or Switzerland write their history textbooks? You can tell a lot about how people from a country view history and the world at large by looking at their history classes and such.

For instance, textbooks here in the U.S.A. give a whole chapter to the Conflict of 1812 and the Battle of New Orleans, however, I'm given to understand that British textbooks devote maybe a paragraph to the same event. And obviously the Japanese treatment of WWII is radically different from that of, say, Australia.

So my question is this: How do other countries (the ones that have remained "neutral" such as Switzerland and, oh, I don't know...Iceland?) write their history texts. How do they view events like World War Two, the Cold War and other such things?

Does anyone know?

most people in the UK wouldn't be familiar with the war of 1812, as the syllabus in most schools focus on the ancient world, romans and egyptians mainly, then the rest is focused entirely on britain with very little time if at all spent on the empire. medieval, tudors, civil war, restoration (plague and great fire) industrial revolution, victorian and the world wars. social analysis is the main focus, covering religion for the tudors to restoration, then economics and class for the second half, and all of it is very introspective. the only modules that are on anything outside of Britain are the fall of the weimar and rise of the nazis, and the Russian revolution and the rise of communism. Wars and dates aren't really part of it, so the seven year war, napoleonic wars, 100 years war etc never get covered.

as for your question in Iceland ww2 is know as an economic boom thanks to the "british jobs", in the Republic of Ireland its called the emergency, and in Russia its called the great patriotic war.

Ixus Illwrath:

zirnitra:

I know in America the first 8 years of history you are spent being force fed hyperbole about Washington telling his father he cut down his cherry tree and his father telling him "run to my arms; glad am I, George, that you killed my tree; for you have paid me for it a thousand fold. Such an act of heroism in my son, is more worth than a thousand trees, though blossomed with silver, and their fruits of purest gold." and it's actually a load of bollocks. and all the battles during the civil war that took place during the American Civil war in the local area/state.

No one accepts that as fact. They also teach us a lot of nonsense about Columbus and Thanksgiving that we learn shortly thereafter are cutesy lies taught by elementary schoolteachers. You get a much better set of facts in secondary schools.

You're right, US history is damned boring. Because there's not very much of it. It's short, and it's a steep rise to power. Like Tony Montana. I just hope we don't get wasted in the end like he did :)

For the record most history classes in the US start off with Egypt, then Greece and Rome, then the dark ages, the crusades, the enlightenment/renaissance eras, then we get more focused on the US after the revolution. It's a pretty broad spectrum, it just doesn't go to deep in things non-american.

I for one wish they taught us more about African/Indian (the country)/Asian history. Those are 3 seriously neglected topics. You probably learn more about India if you're in the UK because it was part of the empire for a long time. Probably 20th century China as well.

But I'd bet all my marbles you don't learn much about those places that took place before you're ancestors showed up there.

American history isn't boring, its rich and complex particularly on the social scale, one of the modules i put together was the comparative history of the USA UK and Germany as you have want begins with 3 very similiar cultures and the way the diverge in very different directions over 19th and 20th century is fascinating.

Ixus Illwrath:

zirnitra:
then the English civil war

I for one think they should teach US children a lot more about Cromwell. His philosophy was very similar to the American Revolution.

what killing catholics, banning theatre and christmas and ruling by military fiat? but i'm being facetious, i think you meant the ideas of the civil war were similiar, certainly they inspired writers like Locke whos work was homaged (ripped off) heavily in the declaration of independence and constitution.

Something you maybe able to help with actually i've always wondered what happened in the colonies during the civil war, if the conflict spread or what generally happened but I've never found a source that covered any insight would be grand.

Beowulf DW:

We aren't taught that we won, we're just taught that we talked to the British and they finally got it through their heads that they longer owned us. We won the Battle of New Orleans, but that didn't do shit because we were already at peace.

P.S. I thought that the British forces that burned down Washington had sailed from somewhere in the Carribean, not Canada.

yeah it's kinda funny about that, you are taught you won a war that you gained none of the objectives you had in the outset and you lost a lot of ground, including the sacking of your capital

on a side note, the Star Spangled Banner is about the battle, it was written by a prisoner

Capt_Jack_Doicy:

Ixus Illwrath:

zirnitra:
then the English civil war

I for one think they should teach US children a lot more about Cromwell. His philosophy was very similar to the American Revolution.

what killing catholics, banning theatre and christmas and ruling by military fiat? but i'm being facetious, i think you meant the ideas of the civil war were similiar, certainly they inspired writers like Locke whos work was homaged (ripped off) heavily in the declaration of independence and constitution.

Something you maybe able to help with actually i've always wondered what happened in the colonies during the civil war, if the conflict spread or what generally happened but I've never found a source that covered any insight would be grand.

I'm assuming you're from England, then.

Your king decided to outlaw the currency we used, and we would've had to borrow from a banking institution that put all of our money into foreign hands. We were like 'damn' and he was like 'whatcha gonna do about it?' and we were all like 'check this shit out' and we destroyed a bunch of the shit they had here. Then a lot of people died and the French showed up to save the day and the king was like 'screw you guys, I'm goin home'

Then, as the movie Star Wars would point out "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers"

Ok I really shouldn't be posting seeing as I'm studying right now, but I'm studying for history, so thats ok right?

Saskwach earlier summed up basically what we get taught in compulsory history. In Elective year 10 we did 20th Century China, rise of Mao, fall of Chang Kaishek etc and Rise and fall of the Nazi's.

In Year 11, we've so far done Russian Revolution: basically Russia 1900-1917, American Civil War: the South totally should have won that, not cause they were right, they weren't, but they were just shitloads better, Birth of Israel: Self explanatory, and now World at the Beginning of the 20th Century, which is like an overview of the various world powers at the time and the Road to Sarajevo. I think the textbook is great, it presents the history but doesn't make judgments, instead showing the sources and asking objective questions.

I certainly preferred that to the Australian history we learnt (mostly post colonization), cause if you look at it, Australian history is quite boring.

Sure there are some exciting bits, but it only goes back a few hundred years and a lot of that is political. Somewhere like the US, which has only slightly longer recorded history, has a war of independence and a civil war as well as a myriad of other things. In Australia we had a 10 minute revolution with a death toll of 3. Literally 10 freaking minutes!

And when we finally got tired of colonial influence and British domination, when we realised it was time to strike while the iron was hot and throw off the shackles of oppression we... had a vote. Thrilling.
I don't mean to rag on my own country, its important stuff to learn, its just not interesting.

EDIT: Anyone else from Australia find it boring?

Don't American text books go crazy with their involvement in WWII? I remember hearing that some of them even have the war starting when America joined, not when Germany first invaded a foreign country.

Someone on this site from Canada said something about even teachers getting angry at them for making it seem like any other country helped in WWII.

Just as long as you Europeans remember to add the great accomplishments of American Super Saiyan Michael Phelps in future text books, I'll have no problems with you.

Never Forget... Beijing 2008.

FOR AMERICAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

I know in French schools, they teach that the battle of Trefalgar was "a minor naval battle, in which a British Admiral died."
Sore losers much?

Ixus Illwrath:

Then, as the movie Star Wars would point out "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers"

... did you just compare the ol' UK to the First Galactic Empire?

Cool. Makes sense now that I think about it.

poleboy:

Ixus Illwrath:

Then, as the movie Star Wars would point out "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers"

... did you just compare the ol' UK to the First Galactic Empire?

Cool. Makes sense now that I think about it.

Some how, I can't picture Benjamin Disraeli as Darth Vader.

Xhumed:

poleboy:

Ixus Illwrath:

Then, as the movie Star Wars would point out "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers"

... did you just compare the ol' UK to the First Galactic Empire?

Cool. Makes sense now that I think about it.

Some how, I can't picture Benjamin Disraeli as Darth Vader.

As Benjamin Disraeli once said... "You don't even know who I am...".

I broke the curve by learning about the Tudors, the reformation, and the Spanish Inquisition for my A levels. World War 1 and 2 wasn't even an option, leaving me at a distinct disadvantage at university.
I do recall learning that one of the reasons behind the break away of the 13 colonies was their desire not to pay taxes to pay for their defence from the French and Indians, and then they decided to ally with the French to get us out. And that revolutionary France was a hotbed of murder and anarchy leading up to an absolutist dictatorship, so I guess the moral was that you have to be careful of those guys over the pond.

Ixus Illwrath: