Guess who else is re-writing their history books....

Micheon my claim was factual. I accepted almost every fact you brought forward, and noted that I wasn't arguing with you about the other points you made.

The only thing I was arguing is that facts about Mao were removed from the new textbooks. Was he removed from all textbooks? No. Were facts about him removed from the new ones? Yes.

I never claimed he wasn't studied on some grade levels or anything else. I merely said he was omitted. The claim is true according to the article. You can point out that he is still in Jr. high text books. I am not arguing that with you. I agree with that.

But he used to be in high school texts, and now he is not. That is the only fact I am sticking to, and it said as much in the article.

I wasn't arguing anything about Japanese or that it was wrong for the Chinese to change the emphasis of their history texts on a broader scope.

 

If you actually said this earlier, in stead of "The Chinese are also omitting unfavorable parts of their history", I wouldn't disagree. Let's just say you won't be publishing academic paper anytime soon.

Believe me, there's nothing "unfavorable" about Mao (They don't criticise Mao in world history) that was there previously and now is removed.

It's world history textbook (from first paragraph), by the way. FYI, In china, unlike in the US, both junior high and senior high is refered as middle school, sometimes just high school. Usually they teach Chinese history in Junior high, world history in senior high.

Hope this backgroud helps.

 

You are right, I won't be. Even if I did, I wouldn't try to do it on basketball board I am glad that the misunderstanding was cleared up, sorry for not being more clear earlier.

That's all good to know and helpful in how I relate the information in the article. Thanks.

 

I thought we established that the blind glorification of Mao was removed from new textbooks. Are you saying those were all facts now?

 

Sorry to say facts. Coming from textbooks it was presented as fact, but I should have put material on... or about... rather than facts.

 

You do realize that Americans think exactly the same way regarding Chinese?

It's also odd that you acknowledge both governments indulge in the propaganda while notching a personal victory that your side notices it more. Obviously you're immune to the propaganda....

 

Then there is no point of arguing against removing some non-facts, is there?

 

You see, there are more chinese who can read english than americans who can read chinese. It is kinda harder for americans to be exposed to another perpective. A lot of people here have only been exposed to one propaganda machine, while the chinese in US have been exposed to at least two propaganda machines.

In general, the rest of the world (excluding starving africans and etc) knows about americans better than americans know about the rest of the world.

 

He was talking about his experiences growing up and about American kids.

 

One thing I'll say though, American kids in top colleges work a lot harder than their counter part in China.

 

I got to the bottom of page two in this thread, so maybe sanity has prevailed, but FB is dead-on. The automatic defensiveness of the China Defenders, with all due respect, is on full display. FB is one of our most open and fair-minded members, who goes out of his way to see all sides of an issue, and to treat other members with respect. He's far nicer than I am. That he is being steam-rolled here is pathetic. If anyone needs to look in the mirror, it is you guys, not FB.

How can anyone have a discussion about China when the result is something like this. You can get on NewYorker's case for implying that it's the same thing as the Japanese alteration of their history books, and it wouldn't surprise me, but to jump all over FB like this is, pardon me, rude and stupid. I saw this article earlier today, and the first thing that ran through my mind was that it was good that there was a de-emphasis on the political system, and it's "heros," and the second was that China is altering it's history deliberately. No, it's not the same as Japan, in my opinion, but it is what it is. To parse words about it being high school, and this stuff is covered in junior high, is an obvious effort to finesse the truth. History is being altered for political reasons. It is not the end of the world. You don't have to twist your logic into pretzels to make what the government is doing good and pure and wonderful. And you don't have to give someone trying to have a discussion a bunch of crap just because they see it in a way you may disagree with. In my opinion.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

You should really read through all the pages. But preach on, no one is stopping you. LOL.

 

hum, Chinese kids in top colleges in China work pretty hard to get into graduate programs in US. At least that was the case years ago.

And one thing I'll say is, in colleges here in US, chinese (ethnical) kids work a lot harder than their while/black/hispanic classmates.

 

oh no you didn't...

 

What do the text books over there say about Tianamen square and the incident a few years back?



Protests of Chinese government in 1989

DD

 

You should really read the whole thread. I think at the end, FB has agreed with me on pretty much everything I said.

This textbook change is a good move, because it dropped blind glorification of Mao and similar stuff. This change result in a less twisted presentation of history. Of course, if the full history, including Mao's mistakes, is presented in the textbook, it will be best. But it is closer to that goal now, not further. I don't understand why you got worked up when the "delibrate alteration" result in a less inaccurate presentation. I would say "more accurate" but I am afraid you will start labeling me pro-china again.

While the so called "china defenders" (I am probably one in your mind) might have been a bit too denfensive on certain occasions, there have been other occasions poster like you jumped gun by crying "overly defensive" when it was not the case.

 

Probably nothing. If there was any, I'd guess it went like "the PLA, under the the leadership of CCP, made huge sacrifices to restore civic order..."

 

LOL ... talking about someone being sensitive and defensive.

I doubt you have very good idea about what education was like in China decades ago. Back then, there was no free flow of news and information, the society was a lot more closed than it's now. Often we could sense some of the things being lectured weren't exactly the way they were, but we weren't sure what the truth or facts were, either, because we didn't have easy access to alternative views, let alone outside world. We had to take propagandas at their face values because we needed to not only memorize them but also expound on them and write short essays in various exams. We had to do that because we didn't have much choice.

Students in the U.S. have much easier and broader access to free information, by free information I mean less censored news, views, and theories. Yet their perspective on things that are half a world away seem rather limited. Of course there are exceptions, and probably many exceptions, but in general the "stereotype" fits the most.

There is no personal victory I am attempting to claim over you guys. Just an observation.