Texas, Stay Classy

  • Thread starter Thread starter mover
  • Start date Start date
I think you are reading in too much. My point is simply that there was a whole lot more to McCarthyism than a paranoid witch hunt, and that the curriculum should portray that fact. I never claimed one way or the other that there were or weren't violations of civil rights. Of course that belongs in the curriculum, but don't you think the curriculum should also include the rationale behind McCarthyism and given that contemporary historians generally view the movement as more justified compared to even 10-20 years ago, shouldn't the curriculum be updated to reflect that?
 
Not with history. History is far too incomplete in high school. Talk to any history major and they'll tell you that what they learned in high school was almost entirely irrelevant, and sometimes they even have to unlearn it because it's simply wrong.



Besides which the textbooks that Texas students are going to be using are not going to be so inaccurate that it would cause a student to fail a college level history course. You're being dramatic.
 
I'm saying that academia should not decide curriculum. That is kind of like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse
 
on the mccarthy "witch hunt" it should be mentioned that the communists had spies in our atomic programs, interned our bomber crews and stole our bombers to reverse engineer even though we were supposed to be allies and stole eastern europe.
 
You must have gone to a shitty college if they required you to take college level tests based solely on what you remember of your high school curriculum.
 
Instilling ignorance may not cause trouble in college...especially if the anti-intellectual lesson it teaches leads kids away from college all together.
 
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/01/09/peer-review-scandal-shakes-french-geologists/

http://www.naturalnews.com/025171.html

Should I keep going?

To address your assertion generally, I know how the peer review process works. If data can be manipulated to fit a desired outcome, this is not likely to keep an article from publication. Honestly the researcher doesn't even need to disclose it. They can massage their data and it very likely will go unnoticed.

Since most of the TX changes are related to history curricula, it becomes much more of a grey area and much more difficult to get (more or less) accurate narratives and interpretations. In particular with McCarthyism, it was for quite some time acceptable to write the movement off as a paranoid witch hunt. However I don't know of a single historian from the Soviet side that would take this position. In fact, a lot of the criticism directed at the people "hunting" communists was orchestrated by the KGB.
 
That would be a good thing. We're doing a disservice by instituting this "everyone needs to go to college" mentality. Tuition is overvalued and rising at a rate four times that of inflation. Less people need to go to college to slow down tuition growth so that inflation (read: the market) can catch up. But that won't happen. The bubble will eventually burst, though at least this time it will be rather difficult to use the businessman as the country's scapegoat.
 
because it's not a relevant question and is not what this particular change to the TX curriculum addresses
 
In my opinion whether McCarthyism was justified or not is entirely subjective and children should not be indoctrinated to take a particular view. What they should be learning is that modern historians generally agree that McCarthyism had a pretty strong basis in reality and many of the accusations made, in retrospect, are now proven to be justified. As far as I know, every single former KGB agent that has commented on McCarthyism has said it was anything but delusional. They will, however, admit that at the time, it was part of their job to discredit the movement.
 
from what I have seen of the list of changes, the revisions to the history curriculum seem like a step in the right direction. It seems like they are moving away from a dogmatic black and white approach (i.e. "we have separation of Church and state) and instead moving towards a much more nuanced, grey, and appropriate position (how did we end up with separation of Church and state, and why)

Seems like the left is more interested in teaching talking points and ideology rather than history.
 
I now realize that any moron can write for the AP and while respectable media outlets may not publish it MSNBC will.
 
Next will be science education. But evolution is just a theory just like ID/creationism! drr hur drrr
 
Back
Top