Myths from American History Class
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- In the U.S., kids spend a lot of time in history class learning about the American Revolution and the founding fathers. But history books tend to simplify the complex reality of the war and the country’s founding. This episode of School Myths by The Atlantic investigates the overblown, rose-colored glasses that are often donned to teach American students about their country’s history.
Subscribe to The Atlantic on RUclips: bit.ly/subAtlan...
Another school myth? Gym classes. They actually don't reduce obesity rates. Watch here: ruclips.net/video/t5SdcURGol8/видео.html
The Atlantic Maybe producing better quality food might help along with gym classes. Exercise and fresh air, not just obesity, should be a another good reason for recess on the outside grounds rather than the indoor gym. Sooo, I disagree with this message.
I think this sort of misses the point. The Revolution isn’t seen as important because of immediate effects, it is because of what the US would come as time went on.
But still, the shot wasn't "heard around the world". Back then, processes such as the French revolution did receive much more immediate note (and caused Napoleon, which then caused the Bolivarian movement, which destroyed the Spanish Empire, which allowed the British hegemony over maritime trade and made the 19th century the century of British dominance, which made English a global language, which then allowed the US to rise as a primary trader between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans and so on - you could say that the American revolution did cause the French one, but then, definitely, we could go back further to the oft forgotten Seven Years' War, which some historians contend waa actually the First World War, and so on - and that did start in America as well).
But to say it was the shot at Lexington that was "heard around the world" just shows a simplistic understanding of world history.
You’re missing the point, Will.
Its actually hilarious. This video greatly oversimplifies each point it says is oversimplified in schools...total leftist fake news.
EXACTLY
@@seth9820 yep. It's the Atlantic. What did you expect.
I thought everyone learned this in school. The one thing I didn't hear from school was that Washington held out waiting for French assistance, but I knew that they were aiming for French assistance, and I'd argue that waiting for help is better than leading an army much weaker in numbers than the British to their deaths. No military strategy, I'd argue, would have won Americans the war. The British Army wasn't the Spanish Armada. Without France, there would have been no way for the colonies to win outright unless they somehow created a Navy from thin air.
GCNMatt or you could learn about the most important allies: countries like Haudenosauneega, Wabanakik and Lenape Hoki-nk
It isn't entirely true that without France the US would never have won the war unless they created a navy from thin air. The British were fighting a war thousands of miles away from their home against an enemy who was determined to fight for their freedom. In addition, the British had to sustain transoceanic supply lines, something hard at best today, let alone in the late eighteenth century. After the continental army's survival at valley forge in 1777 they were toughened up enough to compete with the British. Lest we forget the whole reason that the French joined the US in the first place- an american victory at the battle of Saratoga. The French weren't stupid, they only wanted to support the US if they knew that the US had a legitimate chance to win, and the US victory at Saratoga proved that. The French were absolutely monumental in helping the US win independence and it is also true as they said in the video that Washington did a lot of holding out for the French, but a full US defeat was never going to happen, even if the French didn't join.
The French definitely helped but were not a major contributing factor of the US getting it's independence. For perspective many sources cite around 17k+ US soldiers that died from disease where as there were only 10k French soldiers that fought in the war, mostly in the battle of Yorktown. Over the 8+ year war there were well over 150k US revolutionary soldiers, and over 1500 battles fought. The 30k German Hessian mercenaries that fought for the British played a larger role then the French. This video and many of it's supporters appear to be ignorant of history.
... The Haitians didn't wait for the French. If ignorant slaves cool do it, I guess Washington was even dumber than that.
Details definitely matter. On the other hand, it only makes sense that American history matters more to Americans than it might to people from other countries. I think it's important to remember that many of those who recorded these events wanted to build a nation and a narrative to go along with it. In light of this (and the many details of the American Revolution), it's no wonder that certain facts receive little mention while others are perhaps somewhat embellished. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if most or practically all of the "conventional" history we have turns out to be true. It strikes me as somewhat unfair to allow the cynicism born of our modern era and politics to sully the motives and actions of historical figures.
Thank you for your well-reasoned and impartial viewpoint.
You are correct in that it's historiography 101 to not judge the past by the standards of the present. However, it is also important to note that public education is a tool, a tool they use to teach what they want you to know and to not teach you what they don't want you to know. I don't mean that in any sort of conspiracy illuminati sense, only that frequently they leave out important details or leave things unaddressed that provide a counter to the narrative they try to build.
Much of the cynicism that you speak of was derived because the idyllic presentation of history that was and is taught in schools turned out to be so contrived and essentially incomplete that it seemed falsified, as people grew up and developed a consciousness of the events. Especially, for those that ended up studying the details (which most American adults never do), it engendered a cadre of cynics.
Actually, you apparently didn't hear what was said in the film clip. It is not the issue that American history matters more to Americans, many of the epic moments, that America perceives as monumental - such as the American Revolution - are never even mentioned in foreign history teachings. The American Revolutionary War, which we consider monumental - as the advent of modern democracy - is not taught at all as part of primary or secondary scholasticism of world history in other parts of the world. That may reflect the larger reciprocal problem that less than 1% of books that are produced in English (despite English being the global language) are texts produced by other nations and translated into English. Essentially, only American and British ideas are produced in the English language and permeated in its distribution around the world.
The "conventional" history that you speak is only true if you only present part of the information and deliberately leave out its ancillary events or details. This is not an issue of modern cynicism, but were even issues when these events happened in their day. History's story only becomes unified and acceptable as "conventional" history when the purveyors of it select what of its details to include and exclude. But illustrating something in its oversimplified assemblage simply serves to dumb down the information presented. It is also an enormous part of the reason that many people following their formal education, do not possess the skills to evaluate new information. There is an enormous problem right now in the U.S. with so many Americans unable to ascertain factual information. Many contemporary Americans do not have the intellectual skills to discern fact from fiction, or the ability to distinguish a reliably researched source versus that of something conjured from thin air or the ionization of the writer's mind.
Simple Minds was a Scottish rock band. It should not become the national standard of American knowledge as you advocate.
It makes sense that the French Revolution would be covered in more countries then the American one. It was for all intents and purposes more important. It forever changed the political climate of Europe, which essentially was "the Western world" in nearly its entirety.
I would criticize the writer of this video, but no writer is given a credit, which just goes to show how much more emphasis was on style than substance.
Uh, you must have skipped the end credits.
Josh Kim the writer is not in the credits lmao
I agree completely she says they were slave owners and there was no push for abolition of slavery. For 1. Yes they owned slaves but so did everyone around the globe. They tried in the original draft of the constitution to abolish it but they knew the slave states woudnt support it and since slavery was dieing out anyway with the cheap cost of actual workers compared to the cost of slave labor. Hence they did attempt to free them but couldn't in order to have the south om its side
It took me learning about US history in my US Foreign Policy course in university to really gain a deeper understanding of what was going on and what it *meant* and what the factors at play were. I'd much rather K-12 progressively teach more complex concepts which play roles in US history and use more complex and obscure examples over time. I think that would engage children more and give them something they can use to apply to current-day politics and other states' histories around the world.
a video complaining about oversimplification is full of oversimplification...
?
"The shot heard around the world" point is very fair, but also we're not taught in schools about every single revolution in Europe that happened before or long after our founding, I mean it doesn't make a lot of sense to devote that much of the limited time teachers have to teach that, but it's obviously important for each nation to teach it's own history and create an environment that enables students to want to be life long learners of history and other subjects.
Yea like in scotland we spend a lot of time in primary school going over the scottish wars of independence but aren’t thought anything about mush else history from eouroupe or otherwise in depth till secondary school
Sarah Hogg
Americans don't learn history at all tho... They literally have a class about the cold war in Europe at uni. War of 1812? Nope not the Napoleonic wars, but some skirmishes in North East of the states.
LL cool J There’s a Cold War class because the Cold War isn’t a simple topic that you can just teach to students and expect them to understand everything. They attempt to teach as much about the Cold War but it really isn’t that interesting to high school students and if you go and push countries that they probably haven’t heard of into the mix it really just dwindles their interest into nothing
It's about how it fits into a wider narrative. From a British perspective, we peaked after the American Revolution, when the French were defeated and we entered the Pax Britannica. Although losing the 13 states was a big deal at the time, in retrospect it doesn't seem like it's worth a huge amount of focus. The Napoleonic Wars are the big ones- from a modern perspective, it could be the French language that dominated the world, not the English one, if we hadn't defeated Napoleon. And the French Revolution is vital to anyone living in the Western world.
To be honest in my school I don't really learn about America history, I learn about American history on RUclips. but I do know some European countries and their history mosy about ancient Rome . that's mostly what I have been taught in history class
I find these kind of whining "what they don't teach you in US History" rants irritating. Public schools only have so much time to cover so much history. Not every perspective and bit of history can always be covered in a semester or two of American history. As a history buff I don't think they teach it enough. Secondly: of course American history is taught differently in other countries. I'm sure we don't hear or know as much about the history of France, Australia or even Canada as much as our own. That's just natural.
In South Africa, we spend a full six months on the French Revolution. Its not our history, but we go into great detail.We also cover American history, but barely consider the War of Independence. We focus on the civil rights movement and the cold war, two things that we also spend six months analyzing. Clearly, the war of independence is not seen as the noteworthy event you believe it is. WE cover French, Australian and Canadian history as it relates to the slave trade and the british empire. It compliments studies of our own history instead of being disregarded.
Keegan Whittal Hey this is unrelated, but how are things in South Africa? Main news sources aren't reporting on you guys, but small journalists are talking about how the government is racist against white people, and how there's an epidemic of white farmers getting murdered. Some people are calling it white genocide, which would be pretty fitting if these things are true.
What are your thoughts on the politics over there, and how is it affection you and other people? Were the things I stated earlier true? Also, what other facts or events would you like to add about the current situation? (Good or bad)
I know I'm asking a lot of questions, but I don't know anyone living in South Africa and I'm curious about the situation
The tales of a dysfunctional state collapsing in on itself are seriously over exaggerated. The murder of white farmers is particularly high, but its not a matter of systemic eradication. Further, it doesn't actually qualify as a genocide considering that there is no organization or institution that is coordinating the murders. The government condemns the attacks, but the death rate is no more significant than the deaths caused by HIV/Aids. The state cannot afford to run protective services around the clock for farmers in far-off and isolated communities.
The fact that it isn't a genocide (as I described above) is why major media outlets don't really cover the issue anymore.
In reality, the hype comes from farmers who were used to being catered to with devotion under the apartheid government and have trouble accepting the shifting national prerogative.
My thoughts on the politics is a different matter. The economic policies of the current administration are just bad. There's no other word for it. I do however feel safe when I go out in public, and as a white person I still enjoy a disproportionate amount of representation in government and the media.
The government isn't racist, but white people see its attempts to empower impoverished black people as a way of ignoring white people. Happy to answer any more questions you may have.
The Cape Town water situation is genuinely appalling. The city was previously our second richest and most developed metropolitan area, but the crisis has had that status diminish somewhat. The issue was that funding requests from the local government (lead by the DA, the official Opposition in parliament) to the National Treasury for improved water sourcing infrastructure wasn't approved entirely. (The Treasury responded in the affirmative several years after the requests were made, and granted less money than was requested). However, the local government isn't blameless, they realized that a shortage was brewing, but they only implemented water restrictions when it was too late and enforced them very poorly "for the sake of tourists". The cause of the crisis was a severe drought over the past six years, a symptom of global warming and climate change.
With the change of President, some improvement has been made. Our currency has gotten substantially stronger. But Cyril has yet to implement any real reforms because he's waiting for the national elections later this year. (Cyril was voted in by Parliament, which is normal as per the constitution, but he wants a vote of confidence from the people before doing anything radical).
American media is shocking. I used to think that CNN was the best but their liberal bias is so obvious that I've lost confidence in them. In America, there's no legislation that reasonably restricts biased news coverage, which partly results in this issue. In SA however, our reasonable restrictions results in news coverage with next to no analysis. The reporting still doesn't favor the government, but the articles are shallow, basically giving the facts alone. For some people that's a good thing, but for me, it stunts our ability to have in-depth national conversations.
Agreed Robert Plumer, both about the whining rants and the lack of teaching the right things. It is just an absurd argument to base the value of events in US History on other countries curriculum choices. What matters is the impact of these events, and the US has an undeniable effect on the world today that is the direct result of the US getting it's independence and the actions of the founding fathers. Like it or not, it is reality, and no matter how many terrible media companies make rant videos trying to rewrite history they will fail because they are wrong.
Visiting England and discovering that they barely even care about the American Revolution, viewing it as that little thing that happened over there, was super eye-opening. This is one of the reasons international travel is so important, to experience other people's perspective on things.
As an American I hate how our schools simplify history. I didn’t learn about the help we got from France until I saw a RUclips video telling about it in 12th grade
What I hate about history class is that they only teach what they want us to know. Like when we were learning about Thomas Jefferson, the textbook called him a great man who was also an abolitionist, but failed to mention he had hundreds of slaves and only granted freedom to a few of them and even had an affair with one (Sally Hemings, her descendants are still alive) Not everyone was fully amazing throughout history
nice oversimplification of complex topics. I hope you understand your script narrator.
lol, doubtful, they are making rant documentaries because they probably failed as a news reader for fake news outlets.
0:50 Britain lost America in 1797? What?
I was taught that England taxed the colony's just so the king could get more gold outfits.
We didn't leave in 1797. We left officially in 1783 but in the U.S., it is 1776.
This video over simplifys things way more then history books do. Further more so of the "facts" are half truths
It is a disgrace people like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams are painted as opportunists. From their works it becomes apparent they genuinely cared about freedom.
Louis Vetter well ... they were slavers so not interested in freedom
Louis Vetter For white land owners.
I couldn't agree more Louis Vetter. Looking at their own writings and actions they were visionaries decades if not centuries ahead of the people they lived among. This video is attacking their character for merely being imperfect as judged by people who lived over two hundred years after them! Only arrogant people that have a complete lack of historical context and empathy could make a video this pathetic.
@@avitardotnet
No the video did a great job showing the myth you are buying it
Without France the Americans probably would lost. But it was the success at Saratoga the changed the conflict from a colonial rebellion to a war on independence. And in that the Americans were not yet fully armed or supplied by France.
My teacher told us that his job wasn’t teacher history, but teaching us to learn. He also mentioned that textbooks are biased.
Good thing they didn't go on to talk about those that did fight for freeing slaves but had to concede in order to pass what they could. The United States is the greatest country in the world. Period. No other country has freed more people in spread wealth among people. We aren't perfect but no country is. Yes I understand the Revolutionary war was a minor blip in the world's timeline but it's what those people fought for that matters. This country is still a beacon of hope on the hill if we allow it to be.
The date given for the independence of the USA is wildly inaccurate, and the phrase "over 170 years earlier" is wrong too: The Treaty of Paris, which ended the American War of Independence, was signed in 3 September 1783, almost 164 years before the independence of India in 15 August 1947; although the Treaty actually became effective on 12 May 1784, September 1783 is usually cited as the time when the USA became independent.
That is the day we *celebrate* our independence, but until that treaty came into effect, those 13 colonies were still part of the British Empire, and the leaders of the rebellion risked being put to death for treason against the Crown, despite declaring their independence in 1776.
It *was* a civil war, until the colonists won, much the same way the later US Civil War would not have had that name if the CSA had won its own independence.
In my country we don't even study the more recent stuff but the roman and the Byzandium era are heavilly mentioned for some reason
It sort of is a shot around heard around the world, if you consider that it was the first colony in the Americas to fight for it's independence. It also was a democracy based on liberal enlightenment-judeo-christian principles, which would serve as a model which most countries followed in the 19th and 20th centuries. You mustn't forget the french revolution didn't actually establish a functioning model of governance that could be copied with it's due alterations all around the world.
Several writers correctly note that teachers don't have enough time to teach history with all its complexities. Of course, history teachers simplify things. But it is equally true that any nation's history contains stories that are uncomfortable to contemplate, moments when the nation or elements of it behaved badly. I'd be amazed if any nation teaches kids their history with all the warts and controversies included. Russian and French and Brazilian students all get a simplified and highly sanitized version of the truth. That's human nature.
America is just very nationalistic. We love our country, and want us to succeed, which we largely have, to the betterment of societies, like crucially supporting the war effort against the Nazis, or to the detriment, like installing various dictators across Latin America who abused human rights all for a quick profit for businesses
This video is overlooked or just wasn't properly advertised.
These aren’t misconceptions from history class, they’re basic parts of it.
The main reason so many of today's 8th graders don't care much about American history is that so many of them aren't really Americans. Students representing the specific "posterity" described in the Preamble to the Constitution tend, on average, to do a bit better on their American history tests. It would be weird to expect otherwise.
They also don't teach about the genocide we committed in the Philippines, freed slaves who fought for the British in the Revolution, or the longstanding consequences of our interventionist foreign policy from the Cold War through to today. They don't teach the propping up of the apartheid ethnostate of Israel or the Korematsu decision that still stands as legal precedent. It's purely imperialist propaganda that paints the US as an altruistic force for good that forces our values of "American Exceptionalism" on the world. That's all without even mentioning the purely white and wealthy perspective that all these stories are told through.
Genocide in the Philippines?? I never learned about that in the Philippines
I love that we prop up Israel.
I briefly learned these in AP us history, but an empasis was not placed on them.
False...U.S. History teacher here...I do
Well good on you for that, your state/district must have a very comprehensive curriculum. Those events and non American perspectives were never taught in my high school education or before, and in fairness I've never pursued history through higher academics. The only bright spot on my state's curriculum is required Holocaust education at all levels of public education, which I only recently found out wasn't the same everywhere. As a teacher, you should know as well as anybody that the same things aren't taught in all classrooms. Keep on teaching that Anti-Imperialist (also hopefully pro worker) history perspective that lots of Americans need to hear the hard truths on. Do you teach about Operation Condor (I wouldn't be surprised if a school year doesn't let you get this far into our Cold War operations abroad in any great detail)? That's some dark stuff we're complicit in that's still shaping our view of South America as citizens and government officials. I don't envy US History teachers in our schools; it must be a tough task to pull so much wool from the eyes of kids that just want to feel good about their country.
"the founders were often only looking out for their own self interests"? Ever heard of the Bill of rights?. What's the benefit in getting lynched for treason?
The French Revolution was influenced by The American Revolution and The French Revolution failed while America succeeded. Thanks 😊🇺🇸❤️🦅
American History Teachers: "Christopher Columbus was a Hero!"
HUGE FIB
Does anyone know that Abraham Lincoln almost dueled with James Shields? It had a _huge_ impact on Lincoln's political methods.
So the whole point of this video was to say that the American Revolution isn't really important in the history of the world, even though it created the worlds most powerful country in the history and for the last 70 has had significant cultural, economic, and military influence... Makes sense
My guess is in every country you spend more time talking about your own history than anything else.
Just because they don't teach it in some places doesn't mean it didn't change the world. In fact, the creation of the United States and the drafting of the Declaration of Independence as well as the US Constitution were among the greatest achievements in human history.
Even OverSimplified wasn’t too into it’s name.
0:53 America did not leave the UK in 1797, we left in 1783 officially. 1787 was when we ratified the Constitution.
Thanks for the video.
Very well put.
Clearly the U.S.A is not alone in this form of teaching. I have discussions with my Canadian friends all the time about who really set fire to the White House in the war of 1812.
The irony is using the UK as source, we adopted our American exceptionalism from them. We learned how to fake history from them.
Thanks for this video. Such a funny little world we live in.
Ok this may apply for only my schools in America but I never learned that our history was world changing. In elementary school we did not study American history. Instead we were making paper turkeys and going to field trips like Monticello and just doing whatever little kids with short attention spans did. (Harass tadpoles in a little old fountain). Middle school came and the first official history class I had was World History (for 6th and 7th grade). In 6th we started off from Hunter gatherers and ended at the fall of the Roman empires. In the middle of the year was Egypt, Byzantine and Mesopotamia and a little bit of ancient China and the mandate of heaven system. 7th grade we learned about small countries in Europe clashing and forming the modern ones today. The black death and the renaissance that came after, time jump to apartheid and 20th century South Africa and European controlled Africa. European re discovery of the New World (only South America at this time). Aztec and Inca Empire and then the genocide of the indigenous with biological warfare. Then we learned about the issues with Spain, France and mostly England. We had a test on the English and French monarchy and conflict that had a rather substantial effect on our final grade at the end of the year. We hardly touched American history until 8th grade that I just finished.
(I wrote this lengthy paragraph so that people will understand that our education doesn't always focus on ourselves and us being the greatest. It obviously varies by state, county and even school. I consider myself lucky to understand a good amount of World history and geography that other kids my age and in country aren't always learning much about. I still may know nothing compared to the average student outside of the US. I wonder if anyone had read all of this. Probably not.
Me (someone who lives in Canada and doesn’t know shit about American history): *watches*
Ah yes, blame them not abolishing slavery even though it was common for the time.
crow Many countries were on the high road of abolishing it during that period and most did way before the Civil War.
Four minuets of my life gone forever.
Americans continue to think of themselves as the most important (and sometimes only) country in the world. but then so did a lot of long gone civilizations
honestly my history teacher did a pretty good job
3 of 4 democratic republicans were southern plantain owners
Public schools sucked at telling history when I was a teen, Just watch youtube.
The American revolution did in fact change the world. Enlightened ideas from the declaration of independence and constitution influenced revolutions in France and in Latin America. In France their revolution was founded on the saying: Liberte, Egalite, and Fraternite, a direct influence from American democracy which was made possible by the American revolution. The US revolution inspired France, but also Latin America, as they both saw how it was possible to revolt against a tyrannical government and institute democratic governments. Simon Bolivar traveled throughout Europe and visited America to learn about these ideas of democracy. Obviously some of US history is embellished, however don't let that overshadow the fact that without the American revolution, the French revolution and Latin American uprisings don't happen, meaning that yes- the American revolution did change the world.
Sorry to complain, but why is the CC in Portuguese with no way to change it to English?
At that time only wealthy were literate; it will illegal to free slaves; and George Washington's stepping down after the initial period is still one of the bravest political acts in the history of Constitutional governments..and while ours does have an exceptional reputation for peaceful leadership change..while others have lasted a decade or two..
That slavery was for "states rights"
It was known as "the shot heard 'round the world," not around the world. Nitpick, but still
It was a war of Independence not a revolution.
I live in Europe and I have never heard about the revolutionary war and I still don't know.
Interesting they want to talk only about the southern myth of the lost cause version of the Civil War but they never talk about this
Perspective is undeniably important for learners of history. However, building a national narrative and celebrating America's founding does not have to be seen as ideologically oppressive. There is something to be said for "painting a rosy picture of the Founders;" It healthy for students of a democratic society to learn the ideals of democracy in the context of their country's history, even if that means leaving out some of the fine print. Curious students and history buffs can delve into the dirty details, but for the average American history student, cynicism should take a backseat to optimism about our country's foundation.
Triff H'Doubler no
I passed U.S History STAAR year with a 92% I love my history. Lmao
Oh hey. I’m related to Robert Morris
From 'The Phrase Finder':
"The phrase originates from Ralph Waldo Emerson's 'Concord Hymn,' 1837 and relates to the start of the American Revolutionary War:
By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April's breeze unfurled;
Here once the embattled farmers stood;
And fired the shot heard 'round the world."
Seems important to mention the actual origin of the phrase you spend so much time on. Odd that a video bashing lack of detail in education would give... so little detail. Personally I learned the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand was the "shot heard round the world," or at least that was the one that stuck with me.
In 1776 these 13 colonies were part of Great Britain not England. Why do Americans always say England?
In DAZED AND CONFUSED, a high school teacher says about the Independence Bicentennial: "Let's not forget what we're celebrating--a bunch of white male slaveowners didn't want to pay their taxes!"
It's true that the Founders owned slaves, but it is also a consequence of living when they did. Some like Benjamin Franklin were abolitionist. Others like Madison and Jefferson wrote laws the eventually lead to the end of slavery, just not in there time. Jefferson did want to free his slaves but if he did they would have quickly been reenslaved; Virginia law actually made this illegal at the time. The Constitutional Convention also had a fierce debate over the issue of slavery, the convention almost ended in failure because of it. the 3/5th compromise was the unfortunate solution at the time. But this is the problem when you judge people according to the moral standards of today; at one point in history, slavery was a moral improvement before slavery enemy populations were killed instead of being enslaved. Just immage the immoral acts the people of the future will accuse us of commiting.
The fact that Benjamin Franklin was an abolitionist proves that it isn't a consequence of living when they did. Besides, most Americans did not own slaves. So that means that even back then, those who owned them were immoral. Slave owners did NOT own slaves in order to help slaves, they owned them because they were a source of cheap labor and agriculture was hard. The north got rid of slavery rather quickly so if someone truly bought slaves in order to help them, they would have sent them to the north. Slavery was immoral back then too.
This video is negects several facts
1) Tomas Jefferson was a slave owner because slaves were given to him since the age of 12 and waa fiercely anti slavery to the point of denouncing it in his first draft of the Declairation of independence.
2) the slave owners were all from the southern colonies, by the time of the revalution slavery had died out in the north. The founding fathers hoped that has the north prospered and the south continued to become an economic backwater slavery would die in the south as well.
3) While most of the founding fathers were very prosperous I assue you they were protecting nothing and gambling everything for the sake of libery. Many of them died from the hardships of the war or it's more mercyful bullets. Of those that did survive other than a lucky few the rest died in poverty.
This video just hates America. I don’t mean that hyperbolically or offendedly, I mean it seriously. I understand there’s a lot of nuance involved with history but this video oversimplifies so much that it can only be taken seriously by people who already subscribe to an anti-American sentiment.
The first claim is the worst one. To say that the American Revolution wasn’t monumental in the changing of world history is absolutely asinine. Just because some countries gloss over it doesn’t mean anything. It’s well known that the American Revolution inspired other revolutions and revolutionaries in Latin America and Europe. It’s like the video is trying to downplay the event that created the eventual superpower that became the US and the first sign of decay of the British Empire.
Is Hamilton in this?
Yikes, you try to dispel myths and end up being a prime example of propaganda and myth-building. Where is Haudenosauneega, Wabanakik and Anishinaabewaki in your explanation? Where is the discussion of the seizure of territories in opposition to still active treaties? Where is the discussion of beginning the still active apartheid countries under the Indian Act and Marshall Laws?
U people are trying to tear America apart u try to make the fight for independence sound bad and insignificant but people fought for something and created a great country if America ever falls apart it’s not from an outside force is because people like you try to make this great and stable country sound horrible YOU ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WILL TEAR THIS AMAZING COUNTRY APART
Society should be based on truth.
As a Canadian, where can i a find a much more complete American history, without just white straight men writing the words?
Yeah she’s right no one really cares about American history these days.
America is bffs with France and thats a fact because France gave them the statue of liberty
You've got the wrong year for the Brit's "losing" America. So much for credibility.
Anyone else get the Trump Media survey ad? It was more than a little biased (naturally).
69000th and I should add the + as it says.
It is "Maratha" not "Martha" (0:30)
should i feel bad for this?
USA history
it wasnt a proxy war. french soldiers actually fought on american soil
Says the over-simplifying video ...
the founders were wealthy business men that fought for there self interest? They would have been hung if the revolution failed and they put everything on the line to fight. The continentals where well supplied? Maybe you should look at the death rates from lack of food in the army. Washington kept the army together and survived long enough to be able to face the British and defeat them. The importance of the French to the American war effort is well taught in us schools, the shot heard around the world is a correct statement because of the other revolutions like the French that followed. This wrong and misleading sounds like it was told through the eyes of a liberal.......................................
This is weak History.
Thomas Jefferson wanted to put an anti-slavery clause in the Declaration of Independence but he and the other founders knew if he did that then the Soithern states wouldn't have fought for the Revolution and none of America would be free
The founders also didn't think slavery was such a big issue. In Northern states it was already basically extinct and all states North of Maryland would outlaw it before the American Revolution was over. And in the South slavery had been on the decline for decades as it just was becoming less and less profitable
So they compromised and figured they would declare "All men are created equal" but not fight slavery yet because it was dying. It wasn't until the invention of the cotton gin that slavery became profitable again and would be able to survive in the South
The founders may not have been perfect but they had a vision that created this nation and would make it the first true Republic on Earth that lasted
This could be a great story,but is kind of a childish assessment.
Great video
This is what is taught in American schools. The author of this piece was probably homeschooled in a church cult, and so is very ignorant and ill-informed.
What your taught is BS. "Common core" has made education in this country useless
Barry and Mac, both of you are incorrect, there settled.
William - nah mac is right I learned all this shit before I even got to college
Pretty sad that you commenters can’t even spell correctly, yet you defend this tripe as “factual”. Get educated, instead of just eating whatever the web feeds you.
Mac Kinnon i didn't learn that, US education is dramatically varied from district to district even within high performing states. Your experience is not universal.
I am good at history. Like if you are good at history too
Unfortunately the narrator and maker of this film doesn't understand the details herself. Or she would understand why it was called the shot heard round the world because it was the first time that a territory and fought for its freedom from Great Britain and one. It is also the first time that it democratic government was put into place anywhere in the world. Also, there may have been slaves in America when this War started but go figure there was slaves everywhere in the world. The slave feeling sorry for themselves narrative is getting quite old and obviously if they had wanted to be free they would have done it themselves instead of waiting for social services to take care of them. But according to the letters they were getting from the Homeland most of them knew that they had it quite good here compared to what was going on back in the Homeland where they had come from before they were shipped out to America by their fine leaders in Africa. I mean obviously heard about all of the great African leaders of the 17 + 1800, who ran the world's slave trade business and made big but unfortunately did not share the wealth with those around them or did you miss out on that part of history as well
sjw selective reality.....the atlantic disappoints again
This is such a load of nonsense.
Linda Ballard How so?
Good grief. If you have to ask then pick up a book. American has changed the world. This is so simplistic and ignorant that it hurts my head.
Linda Ballard so in other words you have no sources that this is wrong?
Founding Brothers
The Revolutionary Generation
By: Joseph J. Ellis
1776
By: David McCullough
This topic is too interesting to be left to such a horrible narrator.
now do the oversimplifications of slavery, western expansion, and the history of "racism" on America!
Don't waste your time watching these lies...
Domestic propaganda
Ameritards madx24
fist
me
hand
First*
curse
Things that happened in the U.S. never really effected the world.