logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> "The Empire Strikes Back", European Colonialism and Today
Fma
post Mar 12 2006, 06:59 PM
Post #1


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 115
Member No.: 4,449
Joined: February-2-05

From: Istanbul, Turkey
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



Just recently, I came across this article on the Guardian. Although it is quite old, as a historian I found it very intresting:

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journa...1669006,00.html

AND

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/4-14-2005-68565.asp

QUOTE
More than 1,000 historians, writers and intellectuals have signed a petition demanding the repeal of a new law requiring school history teachers to stress the "positive aspects" of French colonialism.

<snip>

The law of February 23 2005, as it is known, was intended to recognise the contribution of the "harkis", the 200,000 or so Algerians who fought alongside France's colonial troops in their country's war of independence, from 1954-62, before being abandoned to a dreadful fate when the French withdrew - about 130,000 were executed as traitors.

But an unnoticed amendment, apparently tabled by MPs with close ties to France's community of former Algerian settlers, added a new clause to the bill. It reads: "School courses should recognise in particular the positive role of the French presence overseas, notably in north Africa." Opponents are angry in part because, in the words of one eminent historian, Pierre Vidal-Naquet: "It is not up to the state to say how history should be taught."


Now, the questions for debate are:

Is the law passed in France in February 2005 morally justifiable?

Should states pass laws to cover shady parts of their pasts?

Are people right to object such a law?

How do other historians across the world feel about this?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 1)
Victoria Silverw...
post Mar 13 2006, 06:34 AM
Post #2


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,601
Member No.: 608
Joined: March-16-03

From: Chattanooga Tennessee USA
Gender: Female
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Green Party



Is the law passed in France in February 2005 morally justifiable?

This seems pretty objectionable to me in at least two ways. First of all, it's not a good idea for the government to dictate exactly how a certain subject should be taught.

(My understanding is that the French government sets out the schedule for all subject matters taught in all public schools in the nation. To an American, this seems like too much centralized power. It must be remembered, however, that France does not have the same concept of "federalism" as the United States. I don't really object to the French government requiring that, for example, history shall be taught at a certain time of day at a certain school level; I do object to the way that they are placing severely restricted limits on the manner in which it is taught.)

One problem is that there is some precedent in French law for this sort of thing. From the second link provided:

QUOTE
Laws governing how certain periods of history should be taught in French schools have been passed before: a 1990 law outlaws denial of the Holocaust, and a 2001 law dictates that the slave trade be described as a crime against humanity.


This all sounds fine and good, but it sets a very bad example. It should not be necessary to pass a law to teach students the simple truth. The fact that the Holocaust happened, and that slavery was a bad thing, are not exactly controversial, so these laws passed without much notice. However, whether French colonialism had positive effects is highly debatable, to say the least. Now the chickens are coming home to roost, and the troublesome aspects of dictating the exact way that academic subjects shall be taught become obvious.




Should states pass laws to cover shady parts of their pasts?

Obviously not. If for no other reason, sheer self-interest is served when a nation is able to show how it has progressed beyond the questionable parts of its history.

Are people right to object such a law?

Sure.

How do other historians across the world feel about this?

Well, we don't know, of course, but I would imagine that most historians -- even those who might believe that French colonialism was a good thing -- would object to having the government dictate how their subject should be taught.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: January 29th, 2022 - 09:55 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.