Why do people complain about not having a white history month when all we do is...

R

Ryan H

New member
...learn white history? We learn about the Tudours, Adolf Hitler, The Nazis, The Holocaust, World War 1 & 2 and the only thing we learn about black history is slavery, what more do people want?
 
Actually I don't even understand the concept of white history or black history. Anything historic that has happened is not the result of a person;s race anyway. For example there are many great people who have made history but their accomplishments had nothing to do with race. George Washington was a great man but not because he was white, MLK was a great man but not because he was black. By contrast it wasn't because he was white that Hitler was such a vile murderer nor was being black the reason O.J. Simpson committed murder.

People do and say things that make history and focusing on their race tends to diminish the accomplishments.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
I don't think it's quite so simple as "cause some people are racist." Yes, we learn about the Tudors, etc., but in countries which are or were, to a large degree, peopled by predominantly white people, it is natural that the history would concern those events which affected those countries. When I was in school in England we were taught about Indian, South African and North African history - granted, as it related to England and to some degree, the United States.

But to respond to the question - I agree that a white history month is unnecessary.
 
Back
Top