Just not cricket ... the exclusion of Winston Churchill is likely to leave traditionalists aghast. (File photo) (Reuters: Toby Melville)
Posted on 07/12/2007 11:42:03 PM PDT by Stoat
Posted
Updated
Just not cricket ... the exclusion of Winston Churchill is likely to leave traditionalists aghast. (File photo) (Reuters: Toby Melville)
Britain's World War II prime minister Winston Churchill has been cut from a list of key historical figures recommended for teaching in English secondary schools, a government agency says.
The radical overhaul of the school curriculum for 11- to 14-year-olds is designed to bring secondary education up to date and allow teachers more flexibility in the subjects they teach, the Government said.
But although Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Joseph Stalin and Martin Luther King have also been dropped from the detailed guidance accompanying the curriculum, Sir Winston's exclusion is likely to leave traditionalists aghast.
A spokesman for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority said the new curriculum, to be taught from September 2008, does not prescribe to teachers what they must include.
But he added: "Teachers know that they need to mention these pivotal figures. They don't need to be instructed by law to mention them in every history class.
"Of course, good teachers will be teaching the history of Churchill as part of the history of Britain. The two are indivisible."
Sir Winston's grandson Nicholas Soames, also a Conservative Member of Parliament, described the move as "madness."
"It is absurd. I expect he wasn't New Labour enough for them ... this is a Government that is very careless of British history and always has been.
"The teaching of history is incredibly important," he added.
"If you're surprised that people do not seem to care that much about the country in which they live, the reason is that they don't know much about it."
The History Curriculum Association said it was "appalled" by the move, saying the new curriculum would "promote ignorance" and was pandering to a politically-correct agenda.
The Conservatives' schools spokesman Michael Gove added: "Winston Churchill is the towering figure of 20th century British history.
"His fight against fascism was Britain's finest hour. Our national story can't be told without Churchill at the centre."
Schools Secretary Ed Balls defended the move, saying a slimmed-down curriculum was overdue and traditional elements in all subjects had been protected.
Among the few named figures that stay in the new history curriculum are William Wilberforce, the British law maker who was instrumental in efforts to abolish the slave trade.
Sir Winston, who was British prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955, was famous for his defiance to the Nazis, stirring oratory and trademark cigar and "V for victory" sign.
In 2002, a BBC poll with more than one million votes saw him voted the Greatest Briton of all time.
Damn P.C. Nazis taking over.
Well, just golly gee. That was surely the most important observation of the post - maybe the whole thread. So glad you were here to catch it...
Agreed on all counts. If you and other similarly-impassioned folks might like to send a kind word to The Right Honorable Nicholas Soames, MP (Grandson of Winston Churchill) I have no doubt that he would be overjoyed to hear that there is so much support for his grandfather and his grandfather's legacy.
I've already collected some contact information, which you can see at posts #33 and #75.
Perhaps he may be able to advise you on how to go about making your voice heard in the most effective way in this matter?
Getting an avalanche of negative mail on education policy from within the UK is one thing, but adding to that an additional cascade from the USA is something entirely different. Perhaps it could cause a change of heart on the part of the "small-minded education chiefs" ("Sun Says" quote).
Another reason “today’s educators” would delete Winston Churchill
from the syllabi...Winston Churchill was a better WRITER and HISTORIAN
that about 99.99% of the education/history PhDs spat out by today’s universities.
My Exhibit A:
History of the English Speaking People - 4-Volume Box Set
by Winston Churchill
http://www.amazon.com/History-English-Speaking-People-4/dp/077102004X/ref=sr_1_6/002-0432971-8074452?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1184361940&sr=1-6
(personal note: I attended a high school in a VERY conservative
oil/energy town...and a VERY conservative,
fundamantalist church-affiliated Christian college...
but I only stumbled across this gem at a near-by public university.
Yep, this history series was BURIED in the bowels of the reference
section of the library...and I just accidentally stumbled on it.
The RT. Hon. Nicholas Soames
HOUSE COMMONS
London, UK SW1A 0AA
Stoat,
I’m sure I sound a bit maniacal about this “erasure” in history education.
It’s just another maddening example of average talents trying to
elevate themselves by wiping out the memory of great and very human man.
I guess my only excuses for my thoughts are that I’m geographically
close to the site of one of Mr. Churchill’s wise proclamation:
http://www.churchillmemorial.org/
And was recently suprised that there seems to be no modern DVD copy
of a favorite film from my youth (”Young Winston”):
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069528/
I guess that in the past it was the victors that wrote history...
now it seems that the “winners” are the ones that decide which films
will make the leap to DVD (and which will die in VHS obscurity)
I am a traditionalist - and I am aghast!
Don’t forget, the Brits rewarded Churchill for guiding them through WW2 by running him out of office as quickly as practicable.
WOW! That's wonderful! I'm sure that he will be very happy to hear from you.
After receiving such a personal slap as well as in knowing full well the damage to the Truth that this new agenda will wreak upon the world, I am guessing that he is particularly appreciative of support these days.
(A spokesman for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority said the new curriculum, to be taught from September 2008, does not prescribe to teachers what they must include. But he added: "Teachers know that they need to mention these pivotal figures. They don't need to be instructed by law to mention them in every history class. "Of course, good teachers will be teaching the history of Churchill as part of the history of Britain. The two are indivisible.")
He's saying that a competent teacher of history should be trusted to cover key figures like Churchill as a matter of course, and doesn't need a government edict to instruct him to do so. This seems to me be entirely reasonable and a welcome change.,
my post included the following quote
""A report in the Guardian [English newspaper] suggests that despite the revisions, some teachers will offer students their own take on recent events with one young woman who is studying to be a teacher saying: "I will teach my students what I see: that Americans are the terrorists. Bush entered Iraq to take oil, not to free Iraq. They just want money and oil from Iraq. This is what I know and this is definitely what I will teach."
Yep. That'll work.
Me too - along with a lump in the throat and a tear in my eye.
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.…A degraded sensual ism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities ... but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. [The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pp. 248-50.]
Bears reposting!
He was in the countries where the mooseslimes were - he saw it first hand - BUT
It dawned on me - it's writings like this - betcha - that is getting him banned. The mooseslimes have demanded it - betcha.
Yep and he wrote a piece laying out the mooseslimes for exactly what they were when he wrote the piece almost a hundred years ago - could have been written today.
See post # 3
I smell a mooseslime demand to deep six him - so they wont be offended. (It matters naught that any thinking member of the "Infidels", around the world, are mightily offended.
I have just one member in my family that is hard leftist. (He never used to be - until after his stroke. (Just dawned on me that there may be a connection here that would also explain the rest of the libRats - brain damaged.(
Anyway, the edicts of the mooseslimes regarding Pakistan for the mosque battle came up on the news - I made a remark and added that, oh yes, and on England too for knighting Salman Rushdie. My leftie relative says: "Well, they should have known better."
"Excuse me???" I remarked.
"They should have know the Muslims would be offended. They should have known better than to do it."
I should have just let it go, but words started coming out of my mouth, like: "Oh, right. We should have learned our instructions by now. Always be sure, before doing anything, that it wont upset the Mooseslimes. Well, guess what? Blowing people to bits is a little offensive to me."
On that note, I had to leave.
Quote 1. Schools Secretary Ed Balls defended the move, saying a slimmed-down curriculum was overdue and traditional elements in all subjects had been protected.
Quote 2. But the plan — hatched by advisers — angered schools secretary Ed Balls, who vowed to probe ALL the changes to the curriculum.
-----
So which is it? Does Ed Balls defend the change or does it anger him?
Churchill — voted the greatest ever Briton — goes off the required lessons list, along with Hitler, Gandhi, Stalin and Martin Luther King. ... There will also be no need to mention the Wars of the Roses, Elizabeth I or Henry VIII. -- (and all the other changes listed)
The yoot are going to be even stupider than they are now. < :P
The proposals will see traditional timetables torn up, with pupils focusing on modern “relevant” topics such as ... climate change
Yes, make sure that the children are indoctrinated into that.
Schools will be able to stop teaching French, German and Spanish and offer other languages, including Urdu, Chinese, Russian, and Arabic.
The UK is part of the European Union, but it's going to be offering Urdu, Chinese, Russian, and Arabic? Gearing up for something? A huge influx of more Middle Easterners (or Asians, as they like to call them)? Or just gearing up for any possible future overlords?
How the hell are they going to discuss WW2 without mentioning them???
Thank you for taking the time to look that quote up, and for posting it.
“Hey I hear they also dropped Adolf Hitler, and Stalin from the curriculum too.
How the hell are they going to discuss WW2 without mentioning them???”
No-one is saying they shouldn’t mention them (or Churchill) so I doubt it will be a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.