Can we learn anything from our history?

[DiscoDancer]

No man is an island....therefore never send to ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee

Fair comment Dex. Sociologists are fully aware of the phenomenon of those observing affecting the behaviour of those observed.

Similarly, I wouldn't dare to suggest that I'm free of cognitive biases, but being aware of them does help one to understand one's 'world view' and question one's own interpretation of events. I hope it leads me to be more enlightened.

So I consider that I'm fully justified in providing an alternative view of those diehard "anti non-British" brigade, who have no other understandable reason for their 'world view' than that is the way they were taught, or a misunderstanding of history or 'brain-washed' by propaganda.

I don't hold out any hope of persuading those type of people, but perhaps I can provide a more balanced discussion.
Failing that, perhaps I can help themselves to indicate to the audience their own failings.

BTW, I think that DIYnot has gone a long way recently, to remove the posts of some of these explicit posters who obviously do have problems with their cognitive biases.

I'd like to thank DIYnot for this policy.

Incidentally, I'm watching this comedy program now, (Question Time) so no more for tonight.

 

[JBR]

Why do posters find it necessary to resort to insults and accusations when they've obviously lost the argument? Is it an indication of their immaturity or their intellect?

Perhaps we ought to provide a course on 'discussion forum etiquette', or how to provide substantive reasoning to support your argument.

Naah, that wouldn't work, students need a modicum of intelligence, courtesy and honour before they are allowed to start the course.

.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I don't believe that either. In my wife's experience, young adults coming to university from school, despite having bags of 'good' A-levels, are often quite unable to string together coherent sentences in written work (to say nothing of their crap spelling) to the extent that universities are obliged to run 'catch up' courses to educate students to a required basic level of writing.

In the olden days, no-one entered university without a high standard of written English, to say nothing of the much more demanding 'old fashioned' A-levels!

 

[Dextraneous]

@Disco - I wish I could touch-type! I guess we'll never meet, but you remind me of some people I know very well. To say too much more would be sychophantic, but hey ho...

 

[pred]

Your way off coarse with this one Joe, the Boers and Hottentots were not dependent on Holland, /.............../as the Dutch wanted nothing to do with the Boers.

I never suggested that the Boers were dependent on Holland, but they were without doubt descendants of the Dutch settlers. (and German)

If my parents or grandparents were English, I think I can reasonably be descibed as English, don't you think?

I agree that Holland abandoned their people at the Cape and the Boers subsequently cut their ties with Europe, except during the two World Wars, when they were not only spying, but were suspected of being active against the British.

So to suggest that we've always been friends with the Dutch is not true. We may have been friends with Holland in the recent history but if you go back to the 18 Century there were Anglo-Dutch wars.
So your premise is still false. We haven't always been friends with the Dutch!

However, this is all a very minor point in the greater scheme of the thread.

Can you remind me when William of Orange sat on the throne and what country he came from please...

 

[Micilin]

Reading some of these posts I think we need to learn ABOUT history before we can think about learning FROM it .

 

[DiscoDancer]

Can you remind me when William of Orange sat on the throne and what country he came from please...

Of course, pred, happy to oblige.
He was Dutch and he invaded England in the 17 Century.

Now you've disproved your own assertion that we have always been friends with the Dutch.

Carry on, you're doing an excellent job.

 

[DiscoDancer]

Reading some of these posts I think we need to learn ABOUT history before we can think about learning FROM it .

I couldn't agree more, except that:
did anyone see "This Week" last night and the discussion with Dan Snow, Andrew Neil, et al about drama affecting the reality of history. (I'm beginning to suspect that they read these threads for ideas. )

Basically, they were discussing how drama can influence people's perception of the reality of history, leaving them with a distorted view of history.
The Americans capturing the Enigma machine, in drama, and Boldrick's recent spat with Michael Gove was specifically mentioned.

I'm very much aware of other instances, for example, Wilbur Smith's presentation of recent SA history ( Rage, Time to Die) compared to Nelson Mandela's. Bryce Courtenay's presentation (in Power of One and Tandia) is rather more realistic than Wilbur Smith's. (I will continue to read their novels though)

I think the distortion of history is far more widespread, endemic, and deep-rooted than we realise. If those adjectives seem to be self-defeating, I'm happy to explain.
Propoganda, even wishful thinking, it would seem sometimes, affects our perception of the real history.

 

[Micilin]

Reading some of these posts I think we need to learn ABOUT history before we can think about learning FROM it .

I couldn't agree more, except that:
did anyone see "This Week" last night and the discussion with Dan Snow, Andrew Neil, et al about drama affecting the reality of history. (I'm beginning to suspect that they read these threads for ideas. )

Basically, they were discussing how drama can influence people's perception of the reality of history, leaving them with a distorted view of history.
The Americans capturing the Enigma machine, in drama, and Boldrick's recent spat with Michael Gove was specifically mentioned.

I'm very much aware of other instances, for example, Wilbur Smith's presentation of recent SA history ( Rage, Time to Die) compared to Nelson Mandela's. Bryce Courtenay's presentation (in Power of One and Tandia) is rather more realistic than Wilbur Smith's. (I will continue to read their novels though)

I think the distortion of history is far more widespread, endemic, and deep-rooted than we realise. If those adjectives seem to be self-defeating, I'm happy to explain.
Propoganda, even wishful thinking, it would seem sometimes, affects our perception of the real history.

Caught the tail end only. Main arguments for dramatic rewriting were

Pique interest in the subject
Dramatic imperative is to entertain not inform

Don't agree with either , but it is matter of degree.

For example a lot of the debate about 'Michael Collins ' (Neeson one) on the killings in Croke Park were about what game was being played at the time and whether an armoured car was used or whether it was Regular Army or Auxilaries that shot/murdered the peopling the crowd.

If the known detail is right then the debate can be about the 'why' of an event.

That said the 'colour' of the drama is of necessity dependant on recreating conversations that nobody was there for, personalities and filing in gaps or extrapolating some other sources/opinions.

But to say that the British were American in the Enigma film is just silly!

 

[gasbanni]

Russia failed in Afganistan, but what did our politicians do ?

I remember reading no Invading army has ever won in Afganistan, perhaps a look to "History" might have been in order before troops lives were put in the firing line.

 

[DiscoDancer]

I remember reading no Invading army has ever won in Afganistan, perhaps a look to "History" might have been in order before troops lives were put in the firing line.

Maybe our respected leaders thought "third time lucky", i.e our third attempt.

 

[EddieM]

Even spielbergs much acclaimed "historically accurate" saving private ryan is one sided (was there anyone else apart from the yanks involve??) and either inaccurate or plain wrong in some instances.

 

[JBR]

Even spielbergs much acclaimed "historically accurate" saving private ryan is one sided (was there anyone else apart from the yanks involve??) and either inaccurate or plain wrong in some instances.

I thought everybody knew that the Yanks won the war and 'saved our asses'!

We, of course, were just sitting drinking cups of tea.

 

[peterorl]

However Saving private Ryan is not a Documentary so you should not expect complete picture of the case of IIWW

 

[AronSearle]

I remember reading no Invading army has ever won in Afganistan, perhaps a look to "History" might have been in order before troops lives were put in the firing line.

Maybe our respected leaders thought "third time lucky", i.e our third attempt.

Depends on your definition of victory.

Their army was rompstomped, their government toppled and replaced with one backed by us, the country occupied and controlled with minimal losses (several thousand deaths and a population of over 30 million).

Seems like a pretty definitive win.

We only "failed" to achieve the unatainable goal of completely culturally reforming a country of 30 million people in becoming a peacefull modern democracy.

Meh.

 

[gasbanni]

I remember reading no Invading army has ever won in Afganistan, perhaps a look to "History" might have been in order before troops lives were put in the firing line.

Maybe our respected leaders thought "third time lucky", i.e our third attempt.

Depends on your definition of victory.

Their army was rompstomped, their government toppled and replaced with one backed by us, the country occupied and controlled with minimal losses (several thousand deaths and a population of over 30 million).

Seems like a pretty definitive win.

We only "failed" to achieve the unatainable goal of completely culturally reforming a country of 30 million people in becoming a peacefull modern democracy.

Meh.

So that'll be a defeat then.