History in school focuses on European history, which doesn’t really have much racism in it (it has other not-fun stuff). And until fairly recently, especially for eastern Europe, there weren’t that many people of color, so you wouldn’t really encounter racism as an issue. I mean, your parents would say some wild stereotype about black people, but no one would bat an eye, so you wouldn’t know that it’s bad. With internet and general globalization it’s changing now, but there’s still a long way to go
European history “doesn’t really have much racism in it”? Huh? You sure we’re talking about the same european history here? Maybe in some parts of Europe this isn’t taught, but I definitely learned in school about colonialism, the transatlantic slave trade, the Nazi’s racism against Slavs and Romas etc…
I’ll start by saying that I didn’t pay too much attention during history classes, but it probably just puts me closer to the average person on that topic.
The way I remember history classes (I’m from Poland), is that they were heavily focused on our country (excluding sections where we talked about ancient history, obviously) and on how our country fought to keep existing. The wars it had with its neighbors, the fights over land, etc. And Poland didn’t really participate in colonialism, so it was just mentioned that other countries went to Africa and got slaves, but that’s mostly it. And we knew that slavery is bad. But there wasn’t too much effort on elaborating on this topic. Partially because that realization is still trickling in.
I’m simplifying a lot, but I think that’s mostly what you’d carry out of those lessons. Maybe there was a week where we talked about the civil war in America, but that’s very little compared to the rest of the topics, so it doesn’t stay with you.
If you consider the history of Poland, it kind of makes sense. There was a lot of struggle to not be eradicated, to preserve our culture, etc. And that’s reflected in what we learn in school.
And I’m not defending the way it is now. I personally don’t like how “selfish” the point of view in those classes is. But I am sharing my experiences and thoughts, to add some context.
History lessons are a bunch of names and dates that you have to learn by heart. We went there, we made this place, we came back with this shit, we made a church. Here’s a family tree. Even when learning about battles and borders, we don’t get to ask “why were they here? Why were we there?” We just know that we were at war because this king and that king disagreed. Sometimes, at best, one of them just wants control of this location or someone’s wife banged the wrong duke, but that’s almost only for intra European conflicts - and Jerusalem.
Ethnic social issues came very late. Jews and other wandering populations are completely ignored.
History lessons don’t have to be that way, that’s just the way they’ve decided to present these topics to remove the horrible shit their countries did during them
European history is basically “and these people there killed each other because they didn’t like the pope” so it’s not exactly a surprise we are less sensitive to “this is racist” rhetoric, when every single possible reason has been used to justify slaughtering each other. If St. Barthelemy was not racist, why should the crusades be?
American history is pretty much always them murdering non-whites, in comparison
Note that I’m not defending the reasoning, or the problems it creates today, but I see way too many people online acting like Europeans were all BFFs before the empires came up
Do Europeans just not learn about the scramble for Africa and the Berlin Conference of 1885 or something? How do you have so many colonial powers and none of your history classes touch on the murdering of non-whites? This feels like some truly insane educational blinders
Yeah, even in the US (who Europe makes fun of for not knowing history) we spent a ton of time on the triangle trade with Africa (which Europe was very much the creator of and active participant in).
Like the “we didn’t have a lot of racism here” when they were the powers enslaving the native populations to sell to their other colonies…is an insane thing to say.
Yes it did touch the scramble for Africa and Germany’s colonies. But colonialism is a comparitively minor part of that period (1890 - 1920) for Germany so it was the focus for a couple of lessons only. The genocide was covered - but again, only for like a single lesson or two.
There’s just a bit too much history to cramp it down into 90 minutes per week and go over in detail, especially since teaching about the world wars is a priority.
I mean, we literally crammed the period 1970ish to reunification within a single lesson at the very end of 12th grade because we ran out of time.
That’s a fair point. I don’t know that I would say colonialism was minor for Germany, but I suppose the advantage of American education is you have a lot fewer years of crimes against humanity to cover since its a younger country.
I meant more like in the sense of not exceeding a single chapter in a history book. It did happen and was significant – but overshadowed by WW1 happening shortly thereafter and ending German colonization right then and there (except for WW2 but that’s another topic).
A significant part of Europe did not participate in the scramble for Africa, which can in part explain OP pic - the guy is from Poland.
There was no Berlin conference in 1845.
Anyway, each country has its own educational system, with different scope and methods of teaching history (unavoidably wildly different due to different national histories), so making any blanket statement on what is taught in Europe is a minefield. Now, I’m pretty sure most kids in Europe are taught about the colonisation of Africa, but how exactly it is presented, how much weight is given to it, how it is integrated into broader cultural discourse (including e.g. does anyone even talk or care about it outside school history lessons) can vary wildly.
Practically speaking, why would Poles have to care e.g. about English colonisation of India a whole lot? Do you really think such stuff can be relevant enough to strongly shape people’s worldview?
Sorry, I wanted to confirm the name and it is listed on wikipedia as the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, and I typo’d it anyway. I think it should be relevant enough to shape peoples worldview though. Its hard not to see parallels with the current campaigns of genocidal colonial starvation.
Is it really self reflection when the question is. Should a HUMAN be punched in the face.
The issue is, they think they aren’t human, so they don’t even stop to think. Kids should be taught that everyone is equal, not the specifics of racism, what does that accomplish? Just reinforces that they think they aren’t human?
I mean, your parents would say some wild stereotype about black people
Why would they? There’s been practically no black people here, and little reason to have stereotypes about them. People would say wild shit about the Roma, they’re the default kicking bag in many parts of Europe.
Because it’s funny (to them) and because no one will fight back. The fact that there are no black people here means that you’re free to say whatever you want.
I’d give some examples, but honestly it feels wrong to even quote it, so I’ll pass.
I’ll just add that it isn’t even “agressive racism” (where they hate them or something), just ignorance and lack of reflection.
Of course, but did your world history classes talk about racism? I’d guess that was a theme in the classes about your own country’s history, whichever country you happen to be from, but not really in world history.
You needed to be taught the basics of the two world wars, the concept of dark ages and renaissance, something about Roman empire probably, etc. And people from countries whose history doesn’t include noteworthy amounts of racism have to learn about the same amount about their country as you had to learn about yours, and have about the same amount of teaching time left for teaching the same things about world history that were taught to you.
Of course, but did your world history classes talk about racism?
Kinda, when the slave trade and the US civil war was covered. I don’t remember how in-depth it was at the time. Was briefly covered in law classes too iirc.
I’d guess that was a theme in the classes about your own country’s history
We had white (by modern standards) slaves and white slaveowners. Nationality/ethnicity is more important, and the reason for most of the killings and hate and bigotry in the region.
In a sense it was a blessing, gave us a better class consciousness, and made me realize sooner how dumb the concept of a race is. Unless self-applied it’s pointless at best, and at worst very harmful.
I’m barely european and it was a 50-50 split. We had a much heavier emphasis on the rest of the world towards the end of the school program/start of college program.
Either way it shouldn’t be taught as part of just history class, law/ethics/literature (at least) come to mind.
History in school focuses on European history, which doesn’t really have much racism in it (it has other not-fun stuff). And until fairly recently, especially for eastern Europe, there weren’t that many people of color, so you wouldn’t really encounter racism as an issue. I mean, your parents would say some wild stereotype about black people, but no one would bat an eye, so you wouldn’t know that it’s bad. With internet and general globalization it’s changing now, but there’s still a long way to go
European history “doesn’t really have much racism in it”? Huh? You sure we’re talking about the same european history here? Maybe in some parts of Europe this isn’t taught, but I definitely learned in school about colonialism, the transatlantic slave trade, the Nazi’s racism against Slavs and Romas etc…
Are slavs a race?
yes?
As a slav myself, TIL.
… So those lessons on the many centuries of European colonization** included zero self reflection on the racism involved?
I’ll start by saying that I didn’t pay too much attention during history classes, but it probably just puts me closer to the average person on that topic.
The way I remember history classes (I’m from Poland), is that they were heavily focused on our country (excluding sections where we talked about ancient history, obviously) and on how our country fought to keep existing. The wars it had with its neighbors, the fights over land, etc. And Poland didn’t really participate in colonialism, so it was just mentioned that other countries went to Africa and got slaves, but that’s mostly it. And we knew that slavery is bad. But there wasn’t too much effort on elaborating on this topic. Partially because that realization is still trickling in.
I’m simplifying a lot, but I think that’s mostly what you’d carry out of those lessons. Maybe there was a week where we talked about the civil war in America, but that’s very little compared to the rest of the topics, so it doesn’t stay with you.
If you consider the history of Poland, it kind of makes sense. There was a lot of struggle to not be eradicated, to preserve our culture, etc. And that’s reflected in what we learn in school.
And I’m not defending the way it is now. I personally don’t like how “selfish” the point of view in those classes is. But I am sharing my experiences and thoughts, to add some context.
Poland was too busy being enslaved by ottomans, tatars and russians to care about racism.
ottomans and tatars?
For many centuries. Google “jasyr”.
History lessons are a bunch of names and dates that you have to learn by heart. We went there, we made this place, we came back with this shit, we made a church. Here’s a family tree. Even when learning about battles and borders, we don’t get to ask “why were they here? Why were we there?” We just know that we were at war because this king and that king disagreed. Sometimes, at best, one of them just wants control of this location or someone’s wife banged the wrong duke, but that’s almost only for intra European conflicts - and Jerusalem.
Ethnic social issues came very late. Jews and other wandering populations are completely ignored.
History lessons don’t have to be that way, that’s just the way they’ve decided to present these topics to remove the horrible shit their countries did during them
European history is basically “and these people there killed each other because they didn’t like the pope” so it’s not exactly a surprise we are less sensitive to “this is racist” rhetoric, when every single possible reason has been used to justify slaughtering each other. If St. Barthelemy was not racist, why should the crusades be?
American history is pretty much always them murdering non-whites, in comparison
Note that I’m not defending the reasoning, or the problems it creates today, but I see way too many people online acting like Europeans were all BFFs before the empires came up
Do Europeans just not learn about the scramble for Africa and the Berlin Conference of 1885 or something? How do you have so many colonial powers and none of your history classes touch on the murdering of non-whites? This feels like some truly insane educational blinders
EDIT: Corrected conference date
Yeah, even in the US (who Europe makes fun of for not knowing history) we spent a ton of time on the triangle trade with Africa (which Europe was very much the creator of and active participant in).
Like the “we didn’t have a lot of racism here” when they were the powers enslaving the native populations to sell to their other colonies…is an insane thing to say.
I can only speak for Germany’s history education.
Yes it did touch the scramble for Africa and Germany’s colonies. But colonialism is a comparitively minor part of that period (1890 - 1920) for Germany so it was the focus for a couple of lessons only. The genocide was covered - but again, only for like a single lesson or two.
There’s just a bit too much history to cramp it down into 90 minutes per week and go over in detail, especially since teaching about the world wars is a priority.
I mean, we literally crammed the period 1970ish to reunification within a single lesson at the very end of 12th grade because we ran out of time.
That’s a fair point. I don’t know that I would say colonialism was minor for Germany, but I suppose the advantage of American education is you have a lot fewer years of crimes against humanity to cover since its a younger country.
Sorry, I didn’t mean minor in that sense.
I meant more like in the sense of not exceeding a single chapter in a history book. It did happen and was significant – but overshadowed by WW1 happening shortly thereafter and ending German colonization right then and there (except for WW2 but that’s another topic).
A significant part of Europe did not participate in the scramble for Africa, which can in part explain OP pic - the guy is from Poland.
There was no Berlin conference in 1845.
Anyway, each country has its own educational system, with different scope and methods of teaching history (unavoidably wildly different due to different national histories), so making any blanket statement on what is taught in Europe is a minefield. Now, I’m pretty sure most kids in Europe are taught about the colonisation of Africa, but how exactly it is presented, how much weight is given to it, how it is integrated into broader cultural discourse (including e.g. does anyone even talk or care about it outside school history lessons) can vary wildly.
Practically speaking, why would Poles have to care e.g. about English colonisation of India a whole lot? Do you really think such stuff can be relevant enough to strongly shape people’s worldview?
Sorry, I wanted to confirm the name and it is listed on wikipedia as the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, and I typo’d it anyway. I think it should be relevant enough to shape peoples worldview though. Its hard not to see parallels with the current campaigns of genocidal colonial starvation.
People avoid self-reflection until the last possible moment. It’s unideal, but unsurprising, especially when one sees themselves as uninvolved.
Is it really self reflection when the question is. Should a HUMAN be punched in the face.
The issue is, they think they aren’t human, so they don’t even stop to think. Kids should be taught that everyone is equal, not the specifics of racism, what does that accomplish? Just reinforces that they think they aren’t human?
Why would they? There’s been practically no black people here, and little reason to have stereotypes about them. People would say wild shit about the Roma, they’re the default kicking bag in many parts of Europe.
Because it’s funny (to them) and because no one will fight back. The fact that there are no black people here means that you’re free to say whatever you want.
I’d give some examples, but honestly it feels wrong to even quote it, so I’ll pass.
I’ll just add that it isn’t even “agressive racism” (where they hate them or something), just ignorance and lack of reflection.
Where are you from?
Y’all got no world history classes?
Of course, but did your world history classes talk about racism? I’d guess that was a theme in the classes about your own country’s history, whichever country you happen to be from, but not really in world history.
You needed to be taught the basics of the two world wars, the concept of dark ages and renaissance, something about Roman empire probably, etc. And people from countries whose history doesn’t include noteworthy amounts of racism have to learn about the same amount about their country as you had to learn about yours, and have about the same amount of teaching time left for teaching the same things about world history that were taught to you.
Kinda, when the slave trade and the US civil war was covered. I don’t remember how in-depth it was at the time. Was briefly covered in law classes too iirc.
We had white (by modern standards) slaves and white slaveowners. Nationality/ethnicity is more important, and the reason for most of the killings and hate and bigotry in the region.
In a sense it was a blessing, gave us a better class consciousness, and made me realize sooner how dumb the concept of a race is. Unless self-applied it’s pointless at best, and at worst very harmful.
We do, but they are simply not the focus. There’s still a very heavy patriotic rhetoric
I’m barely european and it was a 50-50 split. We had a much heavier emphasis on the rest of the world towards the end of the school program/start of college program.
Either way it shouldn’t be taught as part of just history class, law/ethics/literature (at least) come to mind.