It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Historians Find 'Myriad Errors' In VA History Textbooks

page: 2
16
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terrormaster
History is definitely written by the victors. A co-worker and myself were discussing the Civil War just yesterday and how history have a lot of inaccuracies in regards to it. A lot of history portrays the north as having the only African-American soldiers fighting in the war. When in truth there was plenty of African-Americans fighting for the south as well.

S&F



I just want to add, not only did the CSA have African American soldiers, there were thousands of African American slaveowners in the CSA, especially in Louisiana.

Thankfully college level history is more accurate on the facts.




posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I have to say that the original compilers and revisors are really irresponsible and unprofessional...



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Every single history book in existence has tons of errors and mistakes.

History is almost impossible to know in any entirety.

Do you even know what is going on today in full scope? No, no one does! It's impossible to know everything.

Tons of stuff gets left out, lost in time.
Tons of misconceptions are pushed as facts.

I would say roughly 99% of what we call "history" is mostly or partially inaccurate.

The only way to prove it is using a time machine. And that isn't gonna happen anytime soon!



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Why are people in the South still hung up about this war anyway?

So you lost? Deal with it.

History is written by the victors? Who else would write it? If we allowed the South to write history, it would be South-centric and visa-versa.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Sadly, this doesn't surprise me, but it does piss me off.

Being a Civil War reenactor, I was amazed at the BS we had been fed in school about the war. My kids correct their teachers. My son's teacher once told him that she should just let him teach the Civil War section of their History class because he knew much more than she did, and she knew it and was fine with it. As a reenactor, I belong to a confederate regiment. Couldn't tell you how many times I've heard, "OMG! You mean you're FOR slavery???!" No, no and hell no. I am not racist against any race. We were taught in school that the Civil War was a fight to end slavery, and while that's partially true, that is not what the war was started over, nor was it the main reason for the war. I have African-American friends who play confederates. One of them is the most hard-core rebel I think I've ever had the pleasure to meet! They're not offended by the confederacy because they've taken the time to learn their history. I have to say I'm proud of them.

There are other things that I was taught in school that I've found to be wrong, now that I live in the real world. Immigration and becoming an American citizen was one of them. I believed it was one way because that's what I was taught, but when I dated a guy from France, who had lived here for over 20 years, but wasn't yet a citizen, I found out that I had been taught wrong. I've asked people about it since I found out the truth, just to find out if others were taught that as well, and the only ones I've found who were taught the same as I was taught are the ones that went to the same elementary school that I did. It's ridiculous.

I don't live in VA, so that goes to show that the problem is more wide-spread than just one state. I've come to question about half of what I was taught in school.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
Why are people in the South still hung up about this war anyway?


We're not all hung up, we just remember it. How could we not? The whole region was devastated. Only in the past few decades have cities like Atlanta really started coming back from being all but totally destroyed during the war. New Orleans was the 2nd biggest city in the country before the war. After the war, it was devastated. Charleston was burned down too. Richmond was burned down twice, lol.

Richmond is STILL devastated as far as I'm concerned and one of the worst places in the state you could live. There are still ruins in Petersburg just south of Richmond that haven't been cleaned up since the war, to this very day. They were blasted all to hell by artillery during the siege just before the end of the war, and people just evacuated the area and never came back to build back up. The area has one of the highest crime rates in the country, and is still filled with poor.

When you look at things like that, it's really not something that's easy to forget. There are reminders everywhere down here. Only two battles were fought in the North, and only one of those was just barely across the Mason-Dixon line.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Stalin and subsequent soviet leaders were known for completetly cencoring textbooks to adhere to their "perspective" on history.

Im not saying, in just saying....



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   
In response to GogoVicMorrow and DragonTattooz;

The easiest way to explain my perspective on the "Civil War" is to use comparisons to current institutions and trends.

You have to understand that Slavery was an institution; much like our current financial system. And just as our society would have a difficult time getting the Federal Reserve abolished... the same was true in 1861 in regards to slavery.

From books that I have read and various documentaries I have seen, I am convinced that the common person of the day saw slavery as it is... an injustice. But most of the people opposed to slavery where middle to LOW LOW class... and like current social issues, those with the most money get to have their voices a little louder than their opposition.

In my opinion, I think the North used the concept of Slavery in the same way our government used Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" to justify invading Iraq. With Slavery, Lincoln could harness the compassion of the Northern common class and usurp their involvement for his Administrations pursuit of Power.

Flash-forward to today and you can see how race has become a weapon of choice for dividing a nation.

[please read the following carefully]

Right now in America we have been trained that it is wrong for "WHITE" people to be proud of their "WHITE" heritage. To speak of a "WHITE" Race and use the word "PRIDE"... why is this wrong? (rhetorical)

[NOTE: Did you notice that feeling you got reading those statements? That emotion to lash out and call me a bigot... a racist... these words are called "trigger" words for a reason.]

While I agree it is unethical to hold any race above another, apparently some ethnic groups have an opposite belief. The group La Raza comes to mind.

Getting back to OP's topic, I view the Lincoln Presidency as a glaring example of a hypocritical oligarch. How else can you explain the fact that we make such a large issue of Southern Black slaves; yet barely anyone speaks of the horrors Irish Immagrants experienced in the North-East factories.

Hope that helped explain my POV



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by gemineye
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


... I have African-American friends who play confederates. One of them is the most hard-core rebel I think I've ever had the pleasure to meet! They're not offended by the confederacy because they've taken the time to learn their history...


It is amazing the pride one can feel when they realize how emotionally/spiritually empowered their ancestors where.

That is why I feel it is important we not let CNN, Fox News, and the like further separate truth from fiction.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   
great topic. I realized when reading the OP that I couldn't name all the confederate states with 100% certainty nor do i recall being taught exactly what they were in school (I'm 35 now). I would've said 12 states as well. I guess I learned something today.

And I think I remember being told that most of the Indian tribes were in the confederacy although I don't know if that was true now or not. damn 1980's public school edumacation



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Electric Crown
And I think I remember being told that most of the Indian tribes were in the confederacy although I don't know if that was true now or not. damn 1980's public school edumacation


I don't know about "most" but yes, Native American tribes did fight for the Confederacy because they also stood against the Federal Government. They fought the Feds anyway, the Civil War just gave them a relatively good opportunity to attack while the US was distracted with its own split nation.


Originally posted by Areveli
... I have African-American friends who play confederates. One of them is the most hard-core rebel I think I've ever had the pleasure to meet! They're not offended by the confederacy because they've taken the time to learn their history...


I have a lot of trouble understanding this, because slavery was a brutal institution, but I know a black guy who was in Vietnam, who has a rebel flag tattooed on one of his shoulders.

People are complex. I guess history is complex too.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

I have a lot of trouble understanding this, because slavery was a brutal institution, but I know a black guy who was in Vietnam, who has a rebel flag tattooed on one of his shoulders.

People are complex. I guess history is complex too.


I can see why you feel this way. It is instinct to always lump the Civil War and Slavery together. It's like Peanut Butter and Jelly... or... Hamburgers and Fries. We pair them together because these concepts are VERY familiar too us.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by Terrormaster
History is definitely written by the victors. A co-worker and myself were discussing the Civil War just yesterday and how history have a lot of inaccuracies in regards to it. A lot of history portrays the north as having the only African-American soldiers fighting in the war. When in truth there was plenty of African-Americans fighting for the south as well.

S&F



so...slaves fought for the confederates, so they could remain slaves?? now that's what i call a volunteer army!!
i can hear it now..."yesssa massa, i caint wait to faigh agin those bad ole northerners who want to let us go free, i like be'in yeh slave, massa, i trulee do.


Tha statement is simply idiotic, and the refuge of a simpleton who has no knowledge of history.

By the time of the civil war, there were a large number of free blacks owning their own slaves in the south, and also slaves who enlisted with the promise of being freed in the service of the south.

Don't forget who sold slaves to the English at the Ivory Coast, and later sold them to the New Englanders of America; it was other victorious tribes of africans who sold the their conquered to the English and then the Yankee Americans.

You yankees have no clue, being spoon-fed for all your lives the party line that you were the liberators.

Yankee prosperity was made upon the blood of the black slaves bought from black tribes in Africa, whom yankees willingly and gleefully sold to auction at places like Charleston, South Carolina.

Nice dirty little secret isn't it?

It was called the Triangle Trade.




top topics



 
16
<< 1   >>

log in

join