Authoritarion right wing extremists block teaching of history that shows UK in a bad lights

[gtopa1]

a lot of British folk who see it as a civilising influence on the world

Giving gainful employment to those poor, benighted natives.

View attachment 462579

Is that a mountain bike?? Hmm...with mudguard...maybe not.

Greg

 

[Flash]

From the movie "The Americanization of Emily"

Emily Barham: I believe in honor, service, courage, and fair play, and cricket, and all the other symbols of British character. Which have only civilized half the world!

Lt. Cmdr. Charles E. Madison: You British plundered half the world for your own profit, let's not pass it off as the age of enlightenment.

 

[fncceo]

From the movie "The Americanization of Emily"

Emily Barham: I believe in honor, service, courage, and fair play, and cricket, and all the other symbols of British character. Which have only civilized half the world!

Lt. Cmdr. Charles E. Madison: You British plundered half the world for your own profit, let's not pass it off as the age of enlightenment.

I've committed this part to memory, Charlie's (James Garner's character) speech to Emily's mother, Mrs Barnham, played by the priceless English character actress, Joyce Grenfell)...

"War isn't hell at all. It's man at his best; the highest morality he's capable of. It's not war that's insane, you see. It's the morality of it. It's not greed or ambition that makes war: it's goodness. Wars are always fought for the best of reasons: for liberation or manifest destiny. Always against tyranny and always in the interest of humanity. So far this war, we've managed to butcher some ten million humans in the interest of humanity. Next war it seems we'll have to destroy all of man in order to preserve his damn dignity. It's not war that's unnatural to us, it's virtue. As long as valor remains a virtue, we shall have soldiers. So, I preach cowardice. Through cowardice, we shall all be saved. "

 

[Correll]

Schools minister rejects lessons about colonialism and slave trade in case they ‘lower standards’

Petition condemning curriculum for failing to teach ‘Britain’s role in colonisation’ is rebuffed

www.independent.co.uk

They are so predictable, stuck in the thirties and with philistines in charge of our education.

How can you best teach history in a multi culural society ?

Obviously by using your white supremacy to gloss over the aspects that make you look bad.

Teaching history in a "multi-cultural" society would, one supposes, include teaching the defects of all the cultures.

History taught in school rarely gets into that level of detail.

Its more of a collection of actions and dates. I suppose most western countries fall short when we record their actions to minorities. The UK certainly does and so does the US.

How can you put a positive spin on slavery ? Well, you cant so best ignore it.

If you consider the bogus statue wars from last year it all makes sense.

Educated folk - We need to pull down the statues of slavers and other twats !

Dumb reactionary - You cant do that , its our history !!

Educated folk - OK we will put a plaque on it that explains what they did !

Dumb reactionary - Um !!

All - why has this twat got a statue in our town square ?

The establishment uses the teaching of history to reinforce its control over people.

Tearing down our past, because it does not live up to current PC beliefs is not smart or educated, it is actually dumb.


Being able to judge people based on the time they lived in, and with nuance, is actually far smarter and more enlightened than the book burning mob that you people have devolved into.

 

[there4eyeM]

Slavery existed in all times and places. European humanism ended it.

 

[Siberian]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

 

[Vagabond63]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

 

[Blues Man]

History has very little to do with the truth of what actually happened.

 

[Siberian]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

 

[Vagabond63]

History has very little to do with the truth of what actually happened.

"History is a set of lies that people have agreed upon," -Napoleon I

 

[Vagabond63]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

So no actual invasions then. By your logic so does Russian historiography, are you seriously saying Russia was never an expansionist power?

 

[Siberian]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

So no actual invasions then. By your logic so does Russian historiography, are you seriously saying Russia was never an expansionist power?

it was, though unlike Britain most of Russian expansion was via neutralising absolutely deadly external threats.
So, you cannot really equialize them.

 

[Vagabond63]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

So no actual invasions then. By your logic so does Russian historiography, are you seriously saying Russia was never an expansionist power?

it was, though unlike Britain most of Russian expansion was via neutralising absolutely deadly external threats.
So, you cannot really equialize them.

Really? So how many times has Siberia or Turkmenistan, or any other central Asian tribal groupings invaded Russia? OK I grant you that the Mongols kicked your butts, but generally Artillery and rifles tend to beat Bows arrows and the occasional musket. You use the same excuse we used to invade African lands, "OMG, the Xhosa/Zulus (insert tribe name here) are on our borders and they might invade one day, better get in first to "neutralise" the (non existant) threat!"

 

[K9Buck]

Many of the less pleasant parts of American history are eliminated or sparsely covered in US classrooms as well.

Don't worry! These days, we American's are constantly reminded that we're worse than Hitler.

 

[K9Buck]

China has actual concentration camps but China-Joe is undeterred from being their best friend!

 

[Siberian]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

So no actual invasions then. By your logic so does Russian historiography, are you seriously saying Russia was never an expansionist power?

it was, though unlike Britain most of Russian expansion was via neutralising absolutely deadly external threats.
So, you cannot really equialize them.

Really? So how many times has Siberia or Turkmenistan, or any other central Asian tribal groupings invaded Russia? OK I grant you that the Mongols kicked your butts, but generally Artillery and rifles tend to beat Bows arrows and the occasional musket. You use the same excuse we used to invade African lands, "OMG, the Xhosa/Zulus (insert tribe name here) are on our borders and they might invade one day, better get in first to "neutralise" the (non existant) threat!"

Siberia is and was empty, Russian expansion there was not accompanied with suppression or exploitation of local population, except of one or two initial battles for PART of Siberia everything was peaceful and quiet.

As for Central Asian emirares - you are exactly right, they were constantly invading bordering Russian lands capturing Rusians for slave trade and pludging areas.

no comparison with the UK history of overseas conquests...

 

[K9Buck]

Russisn expansuin tgere was not accompanied with suppression of local population

 

[K9Buck]

LOL Siberian You're a clown, a liar and quite possibly a paid troll. Sadly for you and your employer, you have ZERO ability to persuade others to your ridiculous claims.

 

[Siberian]

LOL Siberian You're a clown, a liar and quite possibly a paid troll. Sadly for you and your employer, you have ZERO ability to persuade others to your ridiculous claims.

lol, you are a clown, a lier and most probably a paid troll

why can't you accept existence of narrative not coinsiding with US mainstream propaganda?

feel free to propose examples where I lie

 

[Siberian]

pfff, trading slaves is a minor part of British sins' story, the whole UK History is a set of opression.

I wonder, do they teach Opium wars with China or that the UK invaded Russia at least 3 times?

OK, I'm intrigued. I get Crimean War and The intervention during the Russian Revolution, but that's the third/fourth invasion?

Opium wars were fun, great Britain ended up as the biggest drugs cartel of the 19th century.

Western historiograohy puts everything upside down, as if it was Russian expansion, but Kushka belonged then to a Russian protectorate Khiva.

Panjdeh incident - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

then, in 1720 British empire, being an ally of Sweden sent the fleed headed by armiral Norris to invade Russia in St. Petersburg, but having arrived Norris disvovered a strong Russia fleet and strong fortress Kronstadt and preferred to retreat.

So no actual invasions then. By your logic so does Russian historiography, are you seriously saying Russia was never an expansionist power?

it was, though unlike Britain most of Russian expansion was via neutralising absolutely deadly external threats.
So, you cannot really equialize them.

Really? So how many times has Siberia or Turkmenistan, or any other central Asian tribal groupings invaded Russia? OK I grant you that the Mongols kicked your butts, but generally Artillery and rifles tend to beat Bows arrows and the occasional musket. You use the same excuse we used to invade African lands, "OMG, the Xhosa/Zulus (insert tribe name here) are on our borders and they might invade one day, better get in first to "neutralise" the (non existant) threat!"

and what has Mongolia to do with Russia's expansion?

Kazan, Astrakhan Tatars were deadly threat in 16 century, until we neutralized them.
Crimean Tatars and Turkey were deadly threat till 18th century, they were rading Russia almost yearly, beseaged and burnt Moscow a couple of times, Poland invaded Russia and occupied Moscow for 2 years in 17 century, Sweden, German crusaders, Napoleon, Hitler, UK etc etc.

90% of Russian expansion was caused by extreme external threats, it was a matter of survival to neutralise them.

unlike British robbery of the World.