How is the American War for Independance taught in the UK?

[UberNoodle]

I think it's the Japanese lack of interest in the history of WW2 that's sorta creepy. The only war crime the poms committed was wearing red and walking in a straight line. BTW the red coats were because some paragon of the British officer class thought it'd stop the men freaking out over the wounded, as you'd hardly notice the bleeding and screaming over the loudness of their jackets

As a long term resident of Japan, I somewhat agree, however I don't see the lack of interest as insideous. Ask average, young Americans, Australians, Canadians, etc about their own history and you'll find alarming gaps or entire voids of knowledge there. The same happens in Japan, but it just so happens that the history the subsequent generations are increasingly disinterested in is history that the rest of the world demands Japan never forget.

However, bear in mind that Japanese culture has as its foundation an instinct to avoid all forms of social conflict. The issue between Grin and Square-Enix is an example of this. Rather than just say that the project was all but cancelled, the management danced around the matter, until an inevitable collapse in the relationship occurred. Grin were, perhaps, expected to pick up on that and apologetically withdraw in some way.

Anyway, parts of Japan's imperial history are highly prone to capsize the boat, nationally and internationally, thus those parts are not avoided but quietly and indirectly conversed on. As someone who has observed the two and fro between Japan and China, I can see clearly the deep roots of their troubles, to centuries before any modern war. Discussion over these events in history are frequently derailed by parties on both sides who would rather capitalise on and exploit the issues.

I am not wanting to evoke the 'Boy Who Cried Wolf' here, or even that a leopard cannot change its spots, but as sure as the atrocities did indeed occur, both China and Japan have not been forthcoming or honest about the actual definition, description and scope of those atrocities. There is so much bad blood historically, and sadly it is now inextricable from the current day's economic and political machinations.

However, I am not one to demand that each and every Japanese citizen beg for forgiveness because they are not the ones who purpetrated the sins of their fathers. Any American would resist being expected to do the same for the sins committed against the Native Americans. Acknowledgement is essential, however, Japan is not the kind of place, yet, in which painful and socially dangerous matters are attacked head on.

Progress will always be slow because that's how it has always been for this island nation. Never confuse a lack of comment or protest in Japan for a sign of acceptance or complicity. Otherwise, it is easily that a great many of the young, like so many in every Western nation, don't give a crap about their grandparents' wars.

Funny, our last decent prime minister apologised profusely to the Aboriginal peoples of Australia for our horrible treatment of them over the last 200 years. One of the few times I've ever been proud of my own government. I'm just of the opinion that not knowing ones past equals being doomed to repeat it. But then again, the fact that you brought up the US, one of the few first world countries not to sign up to the international criminal court, on the spurious grounds that evil people might try and charge awesome Americans with completely fabricated war crimes. Man, some countries have pride issues

I'm Aussie too and I got the DVD of that apology so that now, no matter how idiotic things get with our politics, at least I can relive prouder days.
As for the other issue, there are similar problems with putting awesome Americans on trial in other countries. The Korean film, The Host, was inspired by severe ecological malpractise by a US scientist who was incredibly hard to prosecute in any satisfying way. Here in Japan, the traffic crime, sex crime and drunken disorderly, ect that occurs around US bases, doesn't get much better satisfaction for the people who are those soldiers' hosts. Some children of servicemen put a wire across a road at neck hight last year in order to have some fun with potential decapitation. Some poor lady on a scooter was severely injured. I have to check up on that case. Hopefully shithead army brats get struck with the full force of domestic law.

 

[Agent Larkin]

"The Americans were doing badly. Very very badly. Until the French came along and helped them by taking out most of the difficulties the Americans faced. To the point that the French went bankrupt supporting American Independence."

Is how it was taught.

Personally I prefer the "It was a huge tax dodge" train of thought about that Revolution.

I am glad no other countries go bankrupt supporting small revolutions elsewhere. Im really glad america saw frances mistake there and never decided to repeat it multiple times. OWAIT

Was the sarcasm really necessary?

 

[NDBurke]

After ready at least 17 of the pages here(god there is so much!) i can truly understand why the british wouldn't mention the American revolution(American war for independence?) for as much as a small paragraph. One thing i do wonder though is, what about the war of 1812(not sure if it called that in England.). Wasn't that Britain trying to take the colonies back instead of just some uprising that came at a bad time? Is that more of just another thing thats mentioned or is given a bit more depth?
(side note: im american and after reading all this and thinking about my history classes, i now think of our Revolution as more of an uprising and Departure instead of a small band of Colonies fighting against tyrants, so THANK YOU escapist for giving me more info that other wise i would probably never have found on my own.)

The war of 1812 was started by the Americans as they desired to expand into the North West territories among other things including trade restrictions from Britain.

Eeeeehhhhh, not quite.

Because Britain was at war with Bonaparte, it was imposing some sketchy trade restrictions on the growing American Navy. Most notable of which was the drafting of Americans as "British citizens" into the British Navy. As a whole, Britain was still a little sore about the whole "American Nation" thing, and was trying to choke Frances resources wherever it could.

The whole "America wanted our land" thing is what we Canadians tell ourselves to make the War of 1812 a WAY cooler story than it actually was.

America decided enough of that shit, and that it was time to eliminate Britain's presence from North America. This meant a war on two(ish) fronts: the Northern "Canadian" colonies, and the Atlantic front (Louisiana should be noted too, but that's where my knowledge gets a little fuzzy).

For the most part, America cleaned up on the Atlantic front, largely because of innovation with cannon technology at sea.

The Northern front was a different story. Largely due to incompetency on the part of some of its generals, America supremely fucked-the-pooch. A couple of botched early battles resulted in a wave a patriotism in the parts of Canada that would normally be a Cake-walk for the Americans (let alone the better equipped forts in Quebec City, Montreal, and Kingston, or the Navy in the Maritimes).

There was even a point when Northern New York state could have fallen into British, and therefore latter Canadian hands. Anyone here from Rochester, Buffalo, or Syracause? Imagine all of the weed, beer, abortions, gay marriage and public healthcare you could have had!

But, the War of 1812 ceased to be important once the war with Bonaparte came to a close. Britain lost its reason to be a dick to America's Navy, so it stopped drafting its boats. America got what it wanted, and the people in the Canadian colonies (now 'victorious' from defeating America) started talking about having their own nation.

So how is the War of 1812 typically taught?

In America: YA! We kicked ass! Take that Britain!

In Canada: Ya! We kicked ass! Take that America!

In Britain: ***** please. We were facing Napoleon.

 

[ScoopMeister]

Actually, we barely touch on it here. I t was mentioned a couple of times, but we never went into any detail. It's just not an important part of the syllabus, although I suspect it is in the US.

 

[Purple Dragon]

ir's not covered much
you know the funny part we had actually just cut tea tax and the tea party was organised by smugglers who stood to lose out also there was a fair bit of sympathy for the revolution a the time in England the leader of the opposition turned up in revolutionary uniform FYI all my research not school curriculum in school its mainly they wanted independence they got it oh well there was still Africa and India

 

[Pimppeter2]

I'd guess that its covered like the Haitian Revolution is covered here. Major players are covered and it's lumped with other revolutionary movements during the era.

I would assume not like Vietnam isn't mentioned that much in American. Plain and simple, losses aren't elaborated on.

Erm, Vietnam is thoroughly covered in every History class I've taken since I was little. Hell, I know McNamara like the back of my hand. Yes, I live in America.

What's funny is that its pretty much barely covered in AP US over where I live, but thoroughly examined in Non-Ap US history (mainly because non-Ap is spread over two courses).

So the really bright (or cheater) kids get less education on Vietnam at my high school.

Hmm, my experience is in AP US history too. I live in the Midwest. *shrugs*

 

[punkrocker27]

A Revolution that directly was a direct lead-in to the first democratic exchange of power without bloodshed since the time of the Republic? (and yes, we DO indeed study all those other nations going back from the Neanderthals to the Mesopotamians all the way up to century XX, as one perturbed Spaniard was apt to /rant about.) Naw, that's not at all significant. :/

Hopefully shithead army brats get struck with the full force of domestic law.

Indeed, the rowdy behavior I hear about from some of those fresh-outta-highschool enlisteds doesn't surprise me but I would hope that the children of experienced officers would show some better discipline. Also unfortunate about the U.S. government still not having ratified it's membership as of yet in the ICC; I agree that justice should be a two-way street.

But I will never apologize for something my ancestors did, especially since they weren't even on this continent when the Native Americans were devastated. Sorry guys, the college grants are enough already right?

 

[Tallim]

After ready at least 17 of the pages here(god there is so much!) i can truly understand why the british wouldn't mention the American revolution(American war for independence?) for as much as a small paragraph. One thing i do wonder though is, what about the war of 1812(not sure if it called that in England.). Wasn't that Britain trying to take the colonies back instead of just some uprising that came at a bad time? Is that more of just another thing thats mentioned or is given a bit more depth?
(side note: im american and after reading all this and thinking about my history classes, i now think of our Revolution as more of an uprising and Departure instead of a small band of Colonies fighting against tyrants, so THANK YOU escapist for giving me more info that other wise i would probably never have found on my own.)

The war of 1812 was started by the Americans as they desired to expand into the North West territories among other things including trade restrictions from Britain.

Eeeeehhhhh, not quite.

Because Britain was at war with Bonaparte, it was imposing some sketchy trade restrictions on the growing American Navy. Most notable of which was the drafting of Americans as "British citizens" into the British Navy. As a whole, Britain was still a little sore about the whole "American Nation" thing, and was trying to choke Frances resources wherever it could.

The whole "America wanted our land" thing is what we Canadians tell ourselves to make the War of 1812 a WAY cooler story than it actually was.

America decided enough of that shit, and that it was time to eliminate Britain's presence from North America. This meant a war on two(ish) fronts: the Northern "Canadian" colonies, and the Atlantic front (Louisiana should be noted too, but that's where my knowledge gets a little fuzzy).

For the most part, America cleaned up on the Atlantic front, largely because of innovation with cannon technology at sea.

The Northern front was a different story. Largely due to incompetency on the part of some of its generals, America supremely fucked-the-pooch. A couple of botched early battles resulted in a wave a patriotism in the parts of Canada that would normally be a Cake-walk for the Americans (let alone the better equipped forts in Quebec City, Montreal, and Kingston, or the Navy in the Maritimes).

There was even a point when Northern New York state could have fallen into British, and therefore latter Canadian hands. Anyone here from Rochester, Buffalo, or Syracause? Imagine all of the weed, beer, abortions, gay marriage and public healthcare you could have had!

But, the War of 1812 ceased to be important once the war with Bonaparte came to a close. Britain lost its reason to be a dick to America's Navy, so it stopped drafting its boats. America got what it wanted, and the people in the Canadian colonies (now 'victorious' from defeating America) started talking about having their own nation.

So how is the War of 1812 typically taught?

In America: YA! We kicked ass! Take that Britain!

In Canada: Ya! We kicked ass! Take that America!

In Britain: ***** please. We were facing Napoleon.

Yeah my bad I started heavily simplifying my answers because of the way the conversations were going. Amusingly the whole thing could have been avoided (or at least delayed somewhat) because of changes in government had already lifted the trade sanctions but by the time the news crossed the ocean the war had started.

 

[blaize2010]

Its not. I don't recall it ever being covered at school.

really? you'd figure losing one of the biggest colonies britain owned during the age of imperialism would at leas warrant a paragraph. shit, now i feel inconsequential, going to have to break out the flag and the red white and blue spraypaint. is India covered? Australia? as a matter of fact, how far back does your history class go? all the way to roman conquest of the isles? it does make sense, i guess, since US has only, what? two hundred something years of history to it, while england has millenia.

You actually weren't that much of their Empire.

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/pinkbits1897.htm

I couldn't quickly find a 1776 map, but here's a map of the empire from 1897. It gives you a scale of The Empire. As you can see from all the pink (all those underlined names are small Island nations) the 13 colonies in both number and size are only an itsy bit of the Empire.

hm. you'd just figure it would at least be covered, considering we're at least moderately important now. especially since we become big enemies for a while and then a pretty damn important ally. *ahem, allies. just as a sidenote, y'know. ah well, now the next time the english foreign exchange student starts bitching about how dumb we americans are and how little we care about other nations history, i get to bring this up.

"Big Enemies"? When was that? Oh you mean during the revolution? You were a side note on the war with France. You just weren't that important 200 years ago... I'm sure they know you exist now.

war of 1812, we had expanded to almost our current size, only some southwestern territory remaining. we were just a bit stronger then and the conflict was enough to warrant being called a war. there was a lot of tensions between both of our countries for a while. either way, tactically we were a pretty huge help to the english during both world wars. either way, i'm almost certain that they know we exist now. kinda hard to ignore us because of, y'know, "USA!USA!USA!"

 

[Mortons4ck]

Typical American arrogance to assume it's taught at all.

Seeing as it represented a major shift in British priorities from America to Asia, as well as a transition to the "Second" British Empire. I'd say it's pretty important.

Also, 3/10.

 

[Ronarch]

I think it's the Japanese lack of interest in the history of WW2 that's sorta creepy. The only war crime the poms committed was wearing red and walking in a straight line. BTW the red coats were because some paragon of the British officer class thought it'd stop the men freaking out over the wounded, as you'd hardly notice the bleeding and screaming over the loudness of their jackets

As a long term resident of Japan, I somewhat agree, however I don't see the lack of interest as insideous. Ask average, young Americans, Australians, Canadians, etc about their own history and you'll find alarming gaps or entire voids of knowledge there. The same happens in Japan, but it just so happens that the history the subsequent generations are increasingly disinterested in is history that the rest of the world demands Japan never forget.

However, bear in mind that Japanese culture has as its foundation an instinct to avoid all forms of social conflict. The issue between Grin and Square-Enix is an example of this. Rather than just say that the project was all but cancelled, the management danced around the matter, until an inevitable collapse in the relationship occurred. Grin were, perhaps, expected to pick up on that and apologetically withdraw in some way.

Anyway, parts of Japan's imperial history are highly prone to capsize the boat, nationally and internationally, thus those parts are not avoided but quietly and indirectly conversed on. As someone who has observed the two and fro between Japan and China, I can see clearly the deep roots of their troubles, to centuries before any modern war. Discussion over these events in history are frequently derailed by parties on both sides who would rather capitalise on and exploit the issues.

I am not wanting to evoke the 'Boy Who Cried Wolf' here, or even that a leopard cannot change its spots, but as sure as the atrocities did indeed occur, both China and Japan have not been forthcoming or honest about the actual definition, description and scope of those atrocities. There is so much bad blood historically, and sadly it is now inextricable from the current day's economic and political machinations.

However, I am not one to demand that each and every Japanese citizen beg for forgiveness because they are not the ones who purpetrated the sins of their fathers. Any American would resist being expected to do the same for the sins committed against the Native Americans. Acknowledgement is essential, however, Japan is not the kind of place, yet, in which painful and socially dangerous matters are attacked head on.

Progress will always be slow because that's how it has always been for this island nation. Never confuse a lack of comment or protest in Japan for a sign of acceptance or complicity. Otherwise, it is easily that a great many of the young, like so many in every Western nation, don't give a crap about their grandparents' wars.

Funny, our last decent prime minister apologised profusely to the Aboriginal peoples of Australia for our horrible treatment of them over the last 200 years. One of the few times I've ever been proud of my own government. I'm just of the opinion that not knowing ones past equals being doomed to repeat it. But then again, the fact that you brought up the US, one of the few first world countries not to sign up to the international criminal court, on the spurious grounds that evil people might try and charge awesome Americans with completely fabricated war crimes. Man, some countries have pride issues

I'm Aussie too and I got the DVD of that apology so that now, no matter how idiotic things get with our politics, at least I can relive prouder days.
As for the other issue, there are similar problems with putting awesome Americans on trial in other countries. The Korean film, The Host, was inspired by severe ecological malpractise by a US scientist who was incredibly hard to prosecute in any satisfying way. Here in Japan, the traffic crime, sex crime and drunken disorderly, ect that occurs around US bases, doesn't get much better satisfaction for the people who are those soldiers' hosts. Some children of servicemen put a wire across a road at neck hight last year in order to have some fun with potential decapitation. Some poor lady on a scooter was severely injured. I have to check up on that case. Hopefully shithead army brats get struck with the full force of domestic law.

Yeah I've come across some wonderful stories of large groups of US servicemen raping Japanese schoolgirls then conveniently being posted elsewhere before the police even ask to speak with them...

Whoa there, man. Do you know what the Japanese did to American P.O.Ws? They beheaded them. A relative of mine survived the Bataan Death March only be to killed en route to Japan. I don't blame any Japanese person today, but don't go around saying it's all the U.S's fault, because the Japanese did some terrible things, "Rape of Nanking" "Bataan Death March"

Watch The Pacific if you haven't already. It was entirely the U.S's fault in some particular incidents, but the other guys didn't have a clean sheet.

 

[Insobriety]

It's insulting to see that Americans have such a low opinion of the British education system. Every english person grows up knowing that Mel Gibson was responsible for our losses.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

It's not really taught that much but then a lot isn't it. Once you hit A level (optional schooling past 16) you begin to learn colonialism, at least I did, but GCSE (14-16, graded) didn't touch on it. We learnt about rights movements, WW2 and Russia.

Most of our history touches on everything though, we cover major events across the world, not just stuff related to us, my experience in the States was that the emphasis is placed on US history, with world history something entirely different.

In the UK, perhaps because of our involvement in it, history is world history. Everything is given equal merit to our own past.

 

[Calcium]

Can't really add much rather than to say that in my own experience; it wasn't taught. Maybe if I had taken History it would have, but nothing was mentioned in primary nor secondary school. History seems such a broad topic that I can't imagine too many topics can be covered.

History that was taught:

Roman Britian
Norman Conquest
Scottish Wars of Independence
The Slave Trade
Industrial Revolution
World War 2

Can't remember any other topics off the top of my head. Age of Empires 2 probably taught me more history.

 

[Granas3]

Actually, in the Scottish curriculum, both the american and french revolutions get a fair amount of coverage at the middle-high school level (ages 13-15), with the american civl war going fairly indepth should you choose to study history. There isn't much of an emphasis on battles and stuff at the initial level, focussing more on the early colonists and the reasons for the revolution. We actually go a bit more in depth in Modern Studies, with the bill of rights and decleration of independence etc. It's not swept under the rug as some shameful chapter of our past, it's just that nobody really cares. Which shouldn't come as a surprise considering the US' attitude to the the history and geography of every other country.

 

[Flac00]

I think it's the Japanese lack of interest in the history of WW2 that's sorta creepy. The only war crime the poms committed was wearing red and walking in a straight line. BTW the red coats were because some paragon of the British officer class thought it'd stop the men freaking out over the wounded, as you'd hardly notice the bleeding and screaming over the loudness of their jackets

Trust me, with what much of the Japanese military did, they do not want to talk about it at all. And for good reason. Kind of like how we in the US don't like to talk about the whole massacring the Native Americans thing, we just ignore it, even though we do know it was a dark time in our history.

Yeah once again that whole thing... The "Please don't bring up that time I stabbed yo momma, that was a bad time for me" thing doesn't really wash for me. I understand it, sure, but I don't necissarily accept its validity.

Nobody really should, but not much we can do about it