If your family would not tell you , then it is not hard to find out on your own.
If you want to learn about ww2, then read the book: “Why the Allies Won”, and then go get 3 dozen documentary DVD’s of actual footage of the war, and you are good to go.
If you want to learn about Vietnam, then read the book: “**Lyndon Johnson’s War: America’s Cold War Crusade in Vietnam, 1945-1968 **”, and then go to Blockbuster or your local library and rent the 24 set TimeLife series documentary of Vietnam…and you will be an expert on Vietnam and you will probably know more about Vietnam than most h.s. history teachers.
If you dont take the time to do 1. and 2. above, then you werent going to learn it anyways.
Anyways, the point is, you dont need a h.s. teacher to learn about WW2 nor about Vietnam - there are plenty of better alternatives.
Ha Ha!!! I think I was in your class! It is possible, though, that they might have mentioned Indochina and Siam maybe once or twice…probably the same day he talked about the countries of the Belgium Congo and Persia.
Still, even without our h.s. teacher, we still both managed to learn about Vietnam anyways?
Do you have some kind of cite or anything at all to back that up? I know my 10th grade world history class spent about two months on each of the world wars. I assume my teacher based his syllabus on the California state guidelines for teaching world history.
I think the Soviet Union managed to get in a few licks against Hitler on the Eastern Front as well.
I am more inclined to believe that maybe the actual final decision to not teach it was made by a Liberal on the school board, and not a decision made soley by the teacher, or a decision made by the principal. There is a limit to what course plan a teacher can get away with, and the final decision of a course plan is rarely made by the teacher.
I can only speak about Sweden, but the Vietnam war made a huge impact here and I guess that if the war hadn’t been the Baader-Meinhof gang wouldn’t have been either as their roots are in the war protest movement, so saying that it is of no importance outside USA is plainly not true. As for the wording “perhaps the Vietnamese themeselves” I would call it total rubbish.
By and large, it also was not important here either.
I remember that war vividly. Even **during **the Vietnam war, most Americans did not think it to be very important nor worth learning about unless either they were draft age or had a son of draft age. The average person in the United States back in the 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s didnt give 10 seconds thought to the war effort in Vietnam and most of them could not even find it on a world map.
There were no lines at recruiting centers stretching for blocks of Americans lining up to join the Army. Nobody outside of draft age really cared back then.
The guy is 50. He’s not from around here native Californian), so I don’t know about his family. Daddy was probably a John Bircher.
Since the class starts with Reconstruction and goes to present day, I wouldn’t call 6 years ( almost 4 of US involvement) a “blip.” Besides, history isn’t just about trends; it’s about decisions and events. The blast at Hiroshima lasted seconds but changed the world for good. (The atomic genie is never going back in that bottle.)
This teacher says he does not SAY the wars weren’t important to his students, but he does only spend six class days on six wars (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and the Gulf Wars).
Finally, no, the kids won’t learn about WWII, for instance, in other classes. As I’ve said, there is only one course that covers WWII. They hit the Holocaust in middle school because they read *The Diary of Ann Frank *in English class. Of course, some of them will learn about WWII and Vietnam in college, from profs who no doubt expect them to have a passing acquaintance with these conflicts, but there will be an awful lot of them who don’t go to college.
Hardly heard about it until I was forced to set foot on it.
But we did think Castro was going to turn the country around and make a shining jewel out of that obscure Caribbean country, a real worker’s paradise, you bet.
Ah, Virginia history. We never even got to the 20th century in any of my classes. Too much going on in the state during the late 1700s - 1800s. As far as I could tell, the US just went into some sort of deep, contented sleep after the Civil War/Reconstruction.
As for the OPs question. WWII probably had more of an impact on the way the US views the world, and the way the world views the USofA, than any other event. We came out of WWII as THE leading world power and that shapes so many of the choices we (as a nation) make today that it would be hard to find anything that can’t be traced to that event in some way. If a teacher thinks it isn’t worth talking about that then I really have to wonder what he thinks is valuable information for modern students - Paul Revere?
I don’t know, I think France’s May '68 wouldn’t have come to happen without Vietnam, or not as strongly. The whole “make love, not war” stuff was important throughout the developed world. Vietnam is one of the recurring themes in Mafalda, an Argentinian comic strip which is a very important part of Hispanic popular culture (it was only published for ten years, but we use it as a shorthand for many complex situations 30+ years after the final strip); my grandparents bound one year’s worth of Spanish satiric magazine La Codorniz for each of their children thererabouts of 1970, and Vietnam is a recurring theme.
And of course, from where I’m sitting right now, the prologue to WWII was kind of important, although I imagine the teacher mentioned in the OP doesn’t care that the Generalísimo is dead.
So why have schools at all? One’s family can teach the kids to read, and from there the kids can learn about any subject from simple math to calculus, history, biology, government, and every other subject just by seeking out the proper books and videos!
At least some of your list is directly attributable to WWI. Even WWII can be attributed to the terms of peace imposed on Germany following WWI. The present mess in the Middle East and the rise of terrorist states comes directly from the machinations of empire by the Allied powers in WWI, particularly Britain and France.
If you want to go down the rabbit hole that way you’ll be all the way back at domesticating grain and inventing the alphabet before you know it. WWI can be directly attributed to the fallout of imperialism and so on and so on through the rise of the middle class to the Black Death ad infinitum.
No. The partitioning of the Middle East was a direct result of WWI, and WWII was a direct result of onerous terms of peace imposed on Germany. Also, the Great Depression was not a result of WWII, but was in fact cured by it. The recession that followed is a different matter. I’m not going down any rabbit hole here, just clarifying what I see as errors in Airman’s post.
This is certainly not the way I recall it. I’ve asked my parents, and they don’t recall it this way, either. Did you miss all the 60’s and '70s protests?
So a lawyer is teaching history to high school kids? I’m not entirely certain, but that might be part of the problem.
In a high school history class, whether it is world history or US history, the Second World War deserves at least a week. In a US history class, I think you could probably do a week on Vietnam while tying it into the Civil Rights Movement and other social events happening during that time. I’d give it about a day, maybe a day and a half in a world history class. Even within the structure of state mandated course requirements you simply have to take the time to talk about the way WW2 changed the world and the way Vietnam changed the United States.
To claim that either war had no long-term impact is simply asinine. Anyone with a college education (in any field) should be able to articulate how WW2 shaped the bulk of the twentieth century. Vietnam certainly had less global impact than WW2, but its effects are still recognizable today. Hell, the whole way we (“the West”, but the US in particular) fight wars now is shaped by Vietnam, and our war-fighting plans influence our foreign policy.