Black History Month

We learn our own history and the history of everyone we looted. Like Egypt, we looted them to ****.

Posted from TSR Mobile

As it should be. I don't think it makes a lot of sense to teach school kids all the history from every single part of the world. It's not very relevant to them at that time. If you want to learn about the history/culture of other places maybe do it in your own time or get a history degree or something.
It wasn't only Eygpt. This was looted from the benin empire : http://festactown.com.ng/all-about-festac-77/
Not that I'm upset about it unlike the article writer.

What is mainly taught is the nation's history. The reason ancient Egypt is taught is because the British took great interest in this particular civilisation and looted the **** out of it.

I'm sure in China they focus on Chinese history. And the same goes for every other country.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I totally agree with him. I find the whole thing quite stupid, why is it only black people who get a month dedicated to themselves? What about Irish people? They were slaves? They were treated badly? However we don't have Irish History Month do we? What a bunch of bullocks.

I see no value in Black history month. Black people are extremely diverse, there are thousands different and distinctive cultures black people are from. To sweep every black person and their respective culture under the umbrella of Black history month is absurd, ignorant and quite disrespectful.

There's no white history month, no brown history month, No East Asian history month so why should there be a black history month?

The month of October should be called African American appreciation month, I'd see the importance for it then but even then blacks weren't the only discriminated minority in America and they still aren't currently

My argument is that it is racist to see history in terms of skin pigmentation.

But if we do, then practically all British history is white.

For the period between the Roman Conquest and the Second World War (97.5% of the last two thousand years) this country was pretty much entirely populated by white people, and history is a record of their sayings and doings.

But I don't see how pointing that out, seeing everything in racial terms, helps anyone white or black.

Doesn't it just promote division between races?

Look at the comments on this thread.

Do remember that the British, as well as a number of other countries, also enslaved Africans.

Hmm but China is far less multicultural than the UK. Black history is taught but on a limited scale mainly the slave trade but nothing else. My school briefly taught about the Kingdom of Ghana.

So what? What relevancy does slavery have on modern African nations?

Well the slave trade is a pretty massive part of British history.

China is incredibly multicultural it spans half a continent from the borders of India to the Pacific Ocean, about 3000 miles. It has roughly 55 different ethnic groups. That is hell of a lot of different cultures.

I meant in terms of races rather than ethnic groups of China but yes the Slave trade is a major part of British history but I feel it gives a one-sided view in terms of Black History though. :/

A synonym of race is ethnic group.

We also learn about Martin Luther King Jr, Desmond Tutu, Madiba (Nelson Mandela) and many more influential black people throughout history.

Why don't you create one then? Clearly no one has been bothered enough to so far.

Hmm oh because to me you can be from different ethnic groups but be of the same race (i.e black, white). This is why I prefer the term "race" rather than ethnic group.
Yeah this is good I just think we need a bit of range of history to be more known.

I don't know what is sort of history on the national curriculum because I never did it until GCSE and then I didn't study history.

But I was taught I wide variety of history, such as the Aztec, Romans, Greeks (all the Greek mythology, lots of it in Latin), shed loads on the French and then a ton of English history starting at around the invasion of the Roman Empire up until about 1950. Then with a healthy amount of other random stuff like the Mors, Genghis Khan, American Civil War, small chunks of Japanese history and so on. It was pretty much whatever my teachers wanted to teach us to make us more rounded individuals, not what the government thought was appropriate.

It's easy to see how ignorant you are. My comment was in response to someone stating that Black History Month should be renamed to be known as African American History Month; if you had carefully read over the post that I quoted then you would understand this.

clearly is relevant to today as the fact that a large population black people are still being treated as subhuman is a strong indicator of how many peoples' views on black people from that particular time period clearly hasn't changed a lot.

Oh really????? I was never taught this. I would have loved to learn about all of this! At GCSE all we did was learn about the Cold War which I guess was interesting.

Oh really????? I was never taught this. I would have loved to learn about all of this! At GCSE all we did was learn about the Cold War which I guess was interesting.

Really, shed loads of Latin though. I did it for about 5 years, they started teaching it at age 8.

That is the joy of not using the National Curriculum. Teachers can teach what they are passionate about which always makes a subject more interesting.