Assuming that schoolchildren are taught about contemporary comparative politics and international relations (note the sarcasm here), you really think modern US politics and political analysis is shaped by dudes wearing wigs and dueling and using funny language? :rolleyes:
America’s contribution to world political history is really separation of powers and advancing a written codification of democratic governance; they didn’t really do the heavy lifting of political philosophizing on democracy. And, once again, it’s totally irrelevant to someone learning it in the context of world history - which is the context that everyone who isn’t in a US classroom would be learning it in.
Actually, when I went to school in Saskatchewan, we learned next to nothing about the War of 1812 – I think that’s more of an Ontario thing. Not surprisingly, we learned a lot more about the North-West Rebellion and Louis Riel.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that if a battlefield is near your school, you’re much more likely to learn about that battle.
You’re probably right; I don’t think I learned much about the War of 1812 in school in Quebec either. I think we heard more about the Rebellions of 1837-1839.
Agreed. I’m an American, but I grew up farrrrrr away from any of of the conflict sites, and what we learned about the American Revolution really pales in comparison to all the stuff about California’s Mexican history. It was only after I grew up and decided to become a history buff that I really started reading about it. (It turned out to be an interesting topic! Who knew?)
…and Americans wonder why they get called arrogant.
Yes, the American Revolution is an important part of US history. No, it has very little relevance to anyone who isn’t American.
Americans didn’t invent revolutions, democracy, or (for that matter) the Enlightenment. American history didn’t even start to matter in a global way until the 20th century, everything before that was, at most, an interesting sideshow.
The American Revolution was not fought on British soil, was fought largely by non-British Hessian mercenaries and had very little actual consequence for England itself. Comparing it, in terms of BRITISH importance, to the Norman conquest is ridiculous.
I lived in England for three years as a kid, and went to an American school which taught both US and British history. In the British history class, the American Revolution was mentioned in passing as an example of the incompetence of George III – basically that he lost some colonies while distracted by more important stuff, and that was about it. It was one of the first times I realized that America is not as all-fire important to the rest of the world as it is to Americans.
I agree with almost everything here. But everything we did in the 20th century was shaped by what happened in the Revolution. So, to say that it was irrelevant to world history is incorrect, in my opinion.
And, FWIW, I think everyone should be aware of the impact of the Norman invasion. It had profound impacts on the economic development of the western world and on the system of property law that dominates today.
I don’t think people in other countries need to spend tons of time on the American Revolution - there just isn’t enough time to cover everything, but to say that all you need to know is that the Americans were some colonists who rebelled seems awfully silly. You might want to know why and how their reasoning shaped the country’s future system of goverment, ideology, etc. You could probably cover it in 2 or 3 lectures and not have wasted anyone’s time.
I don’t know why anyone would consider this arrogant - I don’t consider Egyptians arrogant because I studied Tut and the Pyramids, or the Sumerians arrogant because I studied Hamurabi’s code, or the Persians arrogant because I studied Darius, or the Greeks arrogant because I studied Plato, or the Indians arrogant because I studied Ghandi, or the Romans arrogant because I studied Remus and Romulus…
When I went to school in Ontario, the text book we used in Grade Seven was Fair Domain, which actually did have a fair amount about the American Revolution, as well as about The War of 1812 and the 1837 Rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada.
You mean the North-West Resistence?
Yeah, I’ve been to Batoche too. Very interesting.
We learned about Riel and Dumont in Grade Eight with the book that followed Fair Domain, which was called One Dominion.
The Grade Six text was called Breastplate and Buckskin, which had to do with European explorers and the Grade Nine text was called Proud Ages, which was an in-depth course on British history. All texts were published by Ryerson and were written by George E. Tait.
All in all, these four texts were a very comprehensive handling of the subject of History. It really bothers me that today, there seems to be very little handling of any sort of History between Grades Six and Nine. But then again, maybe it’s just because this is Manitoba, and Manitoba is one of the worst provinces scholastically.
It’s not as important to British history as the Norman conquest - not by a long shot. But I would say that the two are of roughly equal importance in world hisotry - which, obviously, the British study. Of course, they probably wouldn’t need to cover the Norman conquest in World History, having already gone over it.
Bigger?
How do you say that? The USA is about 3 times the size of India.
Even taking the borders back then, with Pakistan included in India and only the eastern half of the USA, it’s still smaller than the USA.
IMHO the American revolution is not particularly important to most other nations, including Britons, even though it was a colonial issue. Not to seem rude, but there were a hell of a lot more things happening that were of greater importance to Britain both before that time and during.
Out of curiosity, what “world” history is taught in the American syllabus? (By world, I mean excluding domestic history)
It’s arrogant because many Americans seem to have a major problem in grasping just how irrelevant US history is to the rest of the world. The arrogance comes in with the fact that you seem to think the American Revolution is of equal importance to world history with the great civilisations of classical antiquity. It ain’t, and no-one except Americans imagines that it is.
Two or three lectures is actually a lot of class time for such a topic.
When I was in school, the other superpower was the Soviet Union. I’m struggling to remember anything at all that I learned about the USSR during grade school. Certainly nothing about the nature of communism, since I learned about that in high school civics class, and even there they didn’t go into a lot of detail. I don’t think I even learned that they had a revolution in 1917 until HS. But even in HS, we barely touched on its history.
But as someone else said above, we aways ran out of school year before we ran out of history to study. I think I learned virtually all of my 20th century history by outside reading.
So, this was a pretty long time ago, but I’ll try to cover what I remember (and I’ve been drinking tonight…):
I definitely remember learning about:
The French Revolution
Mao’s Revolution
Aparteid (more through my English class, where we read Waiting for the Rain)
Ghandi and Indian independance
Alexander the Great
The Punic Wars - they had elephants
World War II - this was a big one
The Norman Conquest
The Crusades
The Division of the Roman Empire
Israel, lots of this too (I went to a Catholic School, so this may be skewed)
The Magna Carta
The Napoleonic Wars
The Cold War (this could count as US history, so kind of borderline)
The Irish Potato Famine
Typical study of Egypt (Pyramids, Sphinx, etc)
Marxism
The Russian Revolution
I remember Mr. Donelly spreading the rumor about Catherine the Great
I guess we learned a little about Spain from reading Hemmingway
Feudal Japan
Some stuff on South American colonization
Cuba…
I can’t think of anything else, but there was probably some. For the record, out of my 4 high school social studies classes, 1 was American History, 1 was World History, 1 was The Modern World, and 1 was split inot 2 half year courses - 1 in Economics and the other in International Studies.
I assume that you are employing hyperbole here :).
Overstated, I buy. “Irrelevant” is a bit of an exaggeration if you ask me, especially considering the U.S. is currently the sole superpower. US history is short, but includes participation in plenty of little events like WW II or the Cold War that arguably have some bearing on the shape of the last century.
