Stan Tamudo Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 .............................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I think this thread brilliantly demonstrates the problem with teaching History in schools today. We are no longer the Imperialist nation with an Empire that wrote the history books. Gone are the old moral certainties and singular perspectives that made teaching the subject relatively simple, and much time is now spent investigating and discussing the integrity of previously accepted facts. Many 'heroes' of history are also found to have feet of clay, and don't measure up to real scrutiny. What is needed is an overview of history that puts events into order and into context. This seems to be lacking in many young people who fail to realise for example that Tudors and Victorians are hundreds of years apart, or that Vikings appeared in British history after the Romans. Only then can the significance of events be recognised and meaningful debate take place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Harleyman. No need to apologize whatsoever, I didn't take your remark as an insult at all. Yes, I was sorry not to have met the man, but in fairness being introduced to him as his daughters boyfriend may have been a little intimidating bearing in mind he finished up as Colour Sergeant Major Cameron Highlanders. Your comment about me being a follower of Karl Marx I find hilarious. Groucho maybe but I can assure you not Karl. No, as far as any political philosophy is concerned, I am a complete cynic. The ordinary people of the world, who's only wish is to live their lives, raise their families & harm no one who doesn't harm them first, are conned by just about every political system going. Lord Acton said that 'Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Whilst I hesitate to disagree with an undoubtedly brilliant man, I cannot help but feel that he overcomplicated it somewhat. It's simpler than that. No one starts off as a decent human being, attains a position of power & then goes through a change of character & personality. What happens is that ' Corrupt people seek power'. And that is why ALL countries are governed by the the most horrendous, self entitled, greedy bunch of barstewards that are produced in that country. There are honourable exceptions but they are fighting a losing battle. It's looking on the bright side that keeps me going Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Harleyman. No need to apologize whatsoever, I didn't take your remark as an insult at all. Yes, I was sorry not to have met the man, but in fairness being introduced to him as his daughters boyfriend may have been a little intimidating bearing in mind he finished up as Colour Sergeant Major Cameron Highlanders. Your comment about me being a follower of Karl Marx I find hilarious. Groucho maybe but I can assure you not Karl. No, as far as any political philosophy is concerned, I am a complete cynic. The ordinary people of the world, who's only wish is to live their lives, raise their families & harm no one who doesn't harm them first, are conned by just about every political system going. Lord Acton said that 'Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Whilst I hesitate to disagree with an undoubtedly brilliant man, I cannot help but feel that he overcomplicated it somewhat. It's simpler than that. No one starts off as a decent human being, attains a position of power & then goes through a change of character & personality. What happens is that ' Corrupt people seek power'. And that is why ALL countries are governed by the the most horrendous, self entitled, greedy bunch of barstewards that are produced in that country. There are honourable exceptions but they are fighting a losing battle. It's looking on the bright side that keeps me going Who are the "honourable exceptions"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Who are the "honourable exceptions"? That is a Hell of a question Harleyman . Still I'll give it a go. In the three country's where I have a limited knowledge of the subject. Britain. Gladstone -although Disraeli would disagree. Disraeli -although Gladstone would disagree. Lord Palmerston Duke of Wellington Ramsey MacDonald Harold Macmillan Clement Attlee Denis Healey John Major USA John Adams Thomas Jefferson Abraham Lincoln Franklin D Roosevelt Harry S Truman Dwight Eisenhower John F Kennedy George Bush. Senior Bill Clinton Daniel Patrick Moynihan Ireland Michael Collins - really a soldier, held office 8 months in 1922 Arthur Griffiths Sean Lemass Jack Lynch Albert Reynolds Garret Fitzgerald Erskine Childers President Patrick Hillery President Mary Robinson President Mary McAleese President The above politicians gave the impression, at least to me, that they cared for their country's interest before their own. In my view that makes them 'honourable' in a political sense. The fact that a number of them had 'interesting' private lives is of no consequence as far as I am concerned. Providing what took place was between consenting adults I don't see what concern it is of anyone other than the people involved & their immediate family. If we insist on saints to govern us we'll be in a worse state than now, if that's possible. I make no claim to be an expert on political lives & the above opinions are formed only on my current knowledge of the people listed. If someone comes along with further information on them, proving what a bunch of unscrupulous villains they all were in reality, I shall be quite pleased as it will reinforce my original point that you cannot trust people in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 you are kidding of course because we Brits did lose. We lost the empire. Shortly afterwards. For Keeps.You have managed to live quite well without it. Was it ever worth all the blood and treasure it cost. I wish we would take notice. ---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 11:56 ---------- That is a Hell of a question Harleyman . Still I'll give it a go. In the three country's where I have a limited knowledge of the subject. Britain. Gladstone -although Disraeli would disagree. Disraeli -although Gladstone would disagree. Lord Palmerston Duke of Wellington Ramsey MacDonald Harold Macmillan Clement Attlee Denis Healey John Major USA John Adams Thomas Jefferson Abraham Lincoln Franklin D Roosevelt Harry S Truman Dwight Eisenhower John F Kennedy George Bush. Senior Bill Clinton Daniel Patrick Moynihan Ireland Michael Collins - really a soldier, held office 8 months in 1922 Arthur Griffiths Sean Lemass Jack Lynch Albert Reynolds Garret Fitzgerald Erskine Childers President Patrick Hillery President Mary Robinson President Mary McAleese President The above politicians gave the impression, at least to me, that they cared for their country's interest before their own. In my view that makes them 'honourable' in a political sense. The fact that a number of them had 'interesting' private lives is of no consequence as far as I am concerned. Providing what took place was between consenting adults I don't see what concern it is of anyone other than the people involved & their immediate family. If we insist on saints to govern us we'll be in a worse state than now, if that's possible. I make no claim to be an expert on political lives & the above opinions are formed only on my current knowledge of the people listed. If someone comes along with further information on them, proving what a bunch of unscrupulous villains they all were in reality, I shall be quite pleased as it will reinforce my original point that you cannot trust people in power. Both Irish ladies have served their country, including Ulster, with honour, a well deserved inclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 You have managed to live quite well without it. Was it ever worth all the blood and treasure it cost. I wish we would take notice. ---------- Post added 11-05-2013 at 11:56 ---------- Both Irish ladies have served their country with honour, a well deserved inclusion. I had the pleasure of meeting President MacAleese when she visited Sheffield to open the Irish centre near exchange street. She did it at short notice calling in between official visits to Birmingham & Leeds. She gave an excellent speech on the city's historic links to Ireland which date back over 650 years, when Irish metal craftsmen came to what was becoming a major metalwork area. Afterwards I had quite an interesting talk with both her & her husband Martin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 That is a Hell of a question Harleyman . Still I'll give it a go. In the three country's where I have a limited knowledge of the subject. Britain. Gladstone -although Disraeli would disagree. Disraeli -although Gladstone would disagree. Lord Palmerston Duke of Wellington Ramsey MacDonald Harold Macmillan Clement Attlee Denis Healey John Major USA John Adams Thomas Jefferson Abraham Lincoln Franklin D Roosevelt Harry S Truman Dwight Eisenhower John F Kennedy George Bush. Senior Bill Clinton Daniel Patrick Moynihan Ireland Michael Collins - really a soldier, held office 8 months in 1922 Arthur Griffiths Sean Lemass Jack Lynch Albert Reynolds Garret Fitzgerald Erskine Childers President Patrick Hillery President Mary Robinson President Mary McAleese President The above politicians gave the impression, at least to me, that they cared for their country's interest before their own. In my view that makes them 'honourable' in a political sense. The fact that a number of them had 'interesting' private lives is of no consequence as far as I am concerned. Providing what took place was between consenting adults I don't see what concern it is of anyone other than the people involved & their immediate family. If we insist on saints to govern us we'll be in a worse state than now, if that's possible. I make no claim to be an expert on political lives & the above opinions are formed only on my current knowledge of the people listed. If someone comes along with further information on them, proving what a bunch of unscrupulous villains they all were in reality, I shall be quite pleased as it will reinforce my original point that you cannot trust people in power. A pretty good list overall Disraeli was an imperialist. Surprised you included him on your list Gladstone was one of the best. He tried several times to pass a bill through Parliament giving Ireland home rule and failed each time. It took another quarter century almost and a bloody civil war before Irish independence was achieved. Michael Collins downfall was his acceptance of Dominion status for Ireland which earned him the hostility of the Irish republicans who wanted complete and total separation and independence from the rest of Britain. In all fairness to Collins though I dont think he had much choice but to accept it. Strike out John F Kennedy. The image that his election campaign managers created for him was the biggest lie and con job ever pulled on the American voters. Furthermore he was not in office long enough to be classified as either good bad or indifferent I would have included Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon on that list if for the only reason that both men while in office achieved something that other presidents never managed to do in foreign policy Reagan. The end of the cold war and the era of "glasnost" with his Russian counterpart Nixon. Opening up trade with China and thus bringing in what was then an isolated anti-western giant from the cold. The world became just a little bit safer when that happened Finally Jimmy Carter. Although he was only a one term president and his presidency was marred by rising home loan interest rates and the failure to rescue the Amercan hostages from Iran, Carter was and still is a genuinely good and decent man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Harleyman. No problem with Disraeli being an Imperialist, so was the Duke of Wellington! Whist I believe Empires where a bad thing, it has to be accepted that they were a fact of life & people deal with the state of play as it is during their lifetime. If Michael Collins had not been killed in the civil war the 'Irish Problem' would have been settled within fifteen years. He conducted the first successful armed struggle against a Colonial power in the history of the world. He did that in an occupied country, against the largest Empire the world had ever known. Located bang next door to them & with many of his own countrymen -including Catholics- against him. Just think what he would have accomplished with time & space to plan & act. JFK is included for his integrity during the Cuban crisis, he had to stand up to a bunch of warmongering hawks in the military. Not easy for a relatively young & inexperienced man. Forgot to include his brother Robert who may well have turned out to be a fine President. Richard Nixon? err, have you forgotten this was supposed to be a list of honourable politicians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Harleyman. No problem with Disraeli being an Imperialist, so was the Duke of Wellington! Whist I believe Empires where a bad thing, it has to be accepted that they were a fact of life & people deal with the state of play as it is during their lifetime. If Michael Collins had not been killed in the civil war the 'Irish Problem' would have been settled within fifteen years. He conducted the first successful armed struggle against a Colonial power in the history of the world. He did that in an occupied country, against the largest Empire the world had ever known. Located bang next door to them & with many of his own countrymen -including Catholics- against him. Just think what he would have accomplished with time & space to plan & act. JFK is included for his integrity during the Cuban crisis, he had to stand up to a bunch of warmongering hawks in the military. Not easy for a relatively young & inexperienced man. Forgot to include his brother Robert who may well have turned out to be a fine President. Richard Nixon? err, have you forgotten this was supposed to be a list of honourable politicians? Kruschev's first message to Kennedy which showed some sign of reaching an accord on the Cuban crisis saved Kennedy's bacon. The second letter that Kruschev sent was bellicose and aggresive in it's wording and the Kenndy team decided to ignore the second letter and approach the Soviet ambassador in Washington with a reply to the first letter. From there on it was a matter of good diplomatic work between a third party, the Soviet ambassador and the Kennedy team. Kennedy gets far too much credit for his image of Gary Cooper in High Noon standing up to the bad guys all on his lonesome. Six months after the crisis was over the US pulled out it's missiles based in Turkey on the Russian border. It was by no means the glorious victory over Communist aggression that all were lead to believe As for honour. No President alive or dead ever cheated on his wife so shamefully as did JFK. But Jackie was a good Catholic wife of the old school and chose to turn a blind eye to her husbbnad's continuous and chronic adultry including that with a gagsters moll and a mentally disturbed Hollywoood movie actress. As for Robert Kennedy he was a self serving little weazel who was all Gung Ho for the war in Vietnam then later when popular opinion turned against it sold Lyndon Johnson down the river during his election bid Nixon during his political life suffered from an image problem based on his facial features Voters sometimes seem to want looks over ability when it comes to choosing a leader. Nixon was an experienced politician and a man of great perception and intelligence but in the final Presidential debate with Kennedy just before the election viewers only saw his five o'clock shadow and beetling brows and Kennedy's clean cut move star profile. Even so Kennedy only won by a slender margin and today there is much controversy over Kennedy's father Joe's involvement with Chicago Mob Boss Sam Giancana in getting the crucial Chicago vote in favour of his son John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.