By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - So the Texas Board of Education may rewrite history textbooks... everywhere

Khuutra on 17 March 2010
TheRealMafoo said:

You are calling billshit on gallup?

Oh, and while unrelated, here is a cool fun fact:

Durring the Bush/Kerry election, if all the Republicans who voted, had voted for Bush, and all the Democrats who voted, had voted for Kerry, Kerry would have won.

Let that sink in for a minute. Yes. Democrats put Bush in office the second time, because of the shear number of democrats that voted for the republican candidate.

How often does Louisiana vote Democratic, exactly?



Around the Network
TheRealMafoo on 17 March 2010
famousringo said:
TheRealMafoo said:
famousringo said:
Shocking that the policies of one state could effectively become the policy of the whole nation.

So what happens if, say, New York or California decides push their own competing revisionist textbook standards? Seems to me that this could drive the red state/blue state wedge even deeper.

Texas is one of the only states that tell the school systems whats books they will use. So say, in Cali, 10 school systems could use 10 different history books. In Texas, they all will use one.

This means if you want to sell books in Texas (where the money is), you need to make a great history book (even if the content is slanted). When a major publishing house makes a top rate book, other states will be forced to buy that boo. Because while it has a few things in it that's less then perfect, it's still the best one around.

Hm, so Texas has effectively seized influence over textbook content which no other large state has bothered to exercise. And that might change if some other large state gets irate that Jefferson has been sidelined... or it might not.

It's funny how these things come about.

I just remembered the article I read. I said it wrong.

California does this too, but they have chosen not to buy new text books because they are out of money, so Texas gets to call all the shots for the next few years.



Khuutra on 17 March 2010
famousringo said:
Shocking that the policies of one state could effectively become the policy of the whole nation.

So what happens if, say, New York or California decides push their own competing revisionist textbook standards? Seems to me that this could drive the red state/blue state wedge even deeper.

California is basically flat broke

They can barely afford the paper bags to make new covers for their old books



halogamer1989 on 17 March 2010

Sounds like a good textbook to me. Although I like Jefferson, they should not exclude him as he was pretty conservative.



Kasz216 on 17 March 2010
Khuutra said:
TheRealMafoo said:

You are calling billshit on gallup?

Oh, and while unrelated, here is a cool fun fact:

Durring the Bush/Kerry election, if all the Republicans who voted, had voted for Bush, and all the Democrats who voted, had voted for Kerry, Kerry would have won.

Let that sink in for a minute. Yes. Democrats put Bush in office the second time, because of the shear number of democrats that voted for the republican candidate.

How often does Louisiana vote Democratic, exactly?

They voted for Clinton twice.

Democrats just never play to their actual base and instead try and play to the left.


Hence, why they won Louisna both times with Clinton.  Clinton was a moderate and everyone actually believed that.



Around the Network
Spankey on 17 March 2010

@Khuutra
Sad as it is, Khuutra, History always has and always will change with the times.

Also, try understand that the history you KNOW and LEARNT - Thomas Jefferson's influence etc. - could also have been manipulated from the true state of affairs to suit the times and conditions when you learned it. I hate the fact that it happens, but there's not much to do about it.

I understand where you come from though, after all I was a history scholar in South Africa before and after the fall of the apartheid atrocities. I'm sure you can imagine the changes to history then!

Revisionist history is bullshit.

(hmm...perhaps Penn and Teller could do a show on it!)



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Kasz216 on 17 March 2010
Spankey said:
@Khuutra
Sad as it is, Khuutra, History always has and always will change with the times.

Also, try understand that the history you KNOW and LEARNT - Thomas Jefferson's influence etc. - could also have been manipulated from the true state of affairs to suit the times and conditions when you learned it. I hate the fact that it happens, but there's not much to do about it.

I understand where you come from though, after all I was a history scholar in South Africa before and after the fall of the apartheid atrocities. I'm sure you can imagine the changes to history then!

Revisionist history is bullshit.

(hmm...perhaps Penn and Teller could do a show on it!)

Wasn't the revisonist history after the fall of the apartheid a good thing?

As a history scholar you should know that history is always changing... in actual reality, not just in the minds of men.



Khuutra on 17 March 2010
Kasz216 said:
Khuutra said:

How often does Louisiana vote Democratic, exactly?

They voted for Clinton twice.

Democrats just never play to their actual base and instead try and play to the left.


Hence, why they won Louisna both times with Clinton.  Clinton was a moderate and everyone actually believed.

Would you believe that I believe that Clinton carrying Louisiana had little to do with his actual politics?



Spankey on 17 March 2010
Kasz216 said:
Spankey said:
@Khuutra
Sad as it is, Khuutra, History always has and always will change with the times.

Also, try understand that the history you KNOW and LEARNT - Thomas Jefferson's influence etc. - could also have been manipulated from the true state of affairs to suit the times and conditions when you learned it. I hate the fact that it happens, but there's not much to do about it.

I understand where you come from though, after all I was a history scholar in South Africa before and after the fall of the apartheid atrocities. I'm sure you can imagine the changes to history then!

Revisionist history is bullshit.

(hmm...perhaps Penn and Teller could do a show on it!)

Wasn't the revisonist history after the fall of the apartheid a good thing?

As a history scholar you should know that history is always changing... in actual reality, not just in the minds of men.

of course it was!

History is dynamic

the fact is, history tought in schools changed. The "true" state of affairs is decided by those that write the history books.

what actually happened, or the real influence of a noteworthy individual might never be known outside a very select few or those astute enough to be able to untangle it through serious research of the available historigraphy.

 



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Kasz216 on 17 March 2010
Khuutra said:
Kasz216 said:
Khuutra said:

How often does Louisiana vote Democratic, exactly?

They voted for Clinton twice.

Democrats just never play to their actual base and instead try and play to the left.


Hence, why they won Louisna both times with Clinton.  Clinton was a moderate and everyone actually believed.

Would you believe that I believe that Clinton carrying Louisiana had little to do with his actual politics?


I have no reason to disbleive that you believe that.  Though i would point out that Clinton was  a "big buisness" democrat and the republicans generally couldn't even attack him in their usual way and had to resort to his morality problems.