Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was totally supersized about the comments on the ineffectiveness of brutal war crime style bombing to force countries to surrender by some of our US and Canadian forum members.
Are there other areas where there are big differences in the views on historic events ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
it would probably be wise to avoid the the what is acceptable and what is discrimination topic. there is a huge difference between the two continents, It is well known and has the potential to hijack the opportunity to learn about each others cultural differences.

I would suggest buying bigger clothing then. Maybe consider going on a diet?

I don't understand the first post, but working from the title...

I remember when I went over to Adepticon a few years back and was chatting with Alpharius when the subject of predatory animals came up. I mentioned that we'd had wolves and bears in Britain not that long ago, and he asked when that was. "About three hundred years ago for the wolves', I replied, 'and bears were around back with Alfred the Great, so only about a thousand years or so ago for them.'

He burst out laughing at my response, much to my bemusement. When I asked where the mirth sprang from, he laughed again and said that it was funny, ' Because I was talking about periods of time longer than his country had even existed, yet for me it was "not that long ago."' It would appear growing up in a country where you get taught about the wars with Romans over two millennia ago, unification as England one millennia ago, and a reasonably continuous sense of history/identity subsequently gives you something of a certain perspective on historical time spans not mirrored in the States. It's left me wondering if the Italians/Germans are the same as the States in that regard (having only been unified recently).

 Ketara wrote:


He burst out laughing at my response, much to my bemusement. When I asked where the mirth sprang from, he laughed again and said that it was funny, ' Because I was talking about periods of time longer than his country had even existed, yet for me it was "not that long ago."' It would appear growing up in a country where you get taught about the wars with Romans over two millennia ago, unification as England one millennia ago, and a reasonably continuous sense of history/identity subsequently gives you something of a certain perspective on historical time spans not mirrored in the States. It's left me wondering if the Italians/Germans are the same as the States in that regard (having only been unified recently).

Sometimes I sit down and think about what I know about the course of American history and it occurs to me how very short a span of time it is. I mean, it's 240 years since Independence, which is a long time for any one person, but in the whole picture of it all, if humanity is just a blip in the timeline of Earth, then the United States is just a spec on the blip @_@

It's a very surreal consideration.

The biggest difference is in u.s.a they think they won the war. Then u.k think they won the war "ww2" that is. Solo

When my cousin went to teach in the u.s. "History" . They made her catch up on what their point of view of the wars were. Such as the war of 1812, ww2 ect.

OgreChubbs wrote:
The biggest difference is in u.s.a they think they won the war. Then u.k think they won the war "ww2" that is. Solo

Well it was the USSR that won the war

 LordofHats wrote:

Sometimes I sit down and think about what I know about the course of American history and it occurs to me how very short a span of time it is. I mean, it's 240 years since Independence, which is a long time for any one person, but in the whole picture of it all, if humanity is just a blip in the timeline of Earth, then the United States is just a spec on the blip @_@

No one even knows exactly how the Kingdom of Scotland was formed or even exactly when. The King of the Dal Riata somehow also became the King of the Picts, apparently peacefully, in around 843ish and his heir was crowned King of Scots. that's just about all we know.

1812 is nearly in living memory by comparison

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
The biggest difference is in u.s.a they think they won the war. Then u.k think they won the war "ww2" that is. Solo

Well it was the USSR that won the war

All three were needed to win - Britain would have lost in Africa were it not for the Americans, Russia would have lost if Britain didn't keep up their supply lines, and America would have lost if Russia wasn't there to force Germany into a war on two fronts. But yes, the USSR "won" or finished the war for certain, at least in Europe.

I don't quite understand the OP's question though - my grasp on history is only around the Roman era and wars in the first part of the 20th century; the latter part of the same century I only understand on a cultural level in both Britain and America. Could we have some elaboration on what you mean please, oldzoggy?

G.A

 General Annoyance wrote:

All three were needed to win

You missed the

 Silent Puffin? wrote:


You missed the

Oh, hehe... totally meant to do that...

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

 LordofHats wrote:

 Ketara wrote:


He burst out laughing at my response, much to my bemusement. When I asked where the mirth sprang from, he laughed again and said that it was funny, ' Because I was talking about periods of time longer than his country had even existed, yet for me it was "not that long ago."' It would appear growing up in a country where you get taught about the wars with Romans over two millennia ago, unification as England one millennia ago, and a reasonably continuous sense of history/identity subsequently gives you something of a certain perspective on historical time spans not mirrored in the States. It's left me wondering if the Italians/Germans are the same as the States in that regard (having only been unified recently).

Sometimes I sit down and think about what I know about the course of American history and it occurs to me how very short a span of time it is. I mean, it's 240 years since Independence, which is a long time for any one person, but in the whole picture of it all, if humanity is just a blip in the timeline of Earth, then the United States is just a spec on the blip @_@

It's a very surreal consideration.

If my own education is indicative of how it is for most Americans, the problem is we just really aren't taught our own history all that well. Usually a full two-thirds of it focuses on the Revolution, the Civil War, and WW2. Everything else is treated as an afterthought, and if your history class actually manages to reach the 1970s before the school year is out, it's a miracle. Our world history education pretty much just covers what happened before the American Revolution, with a few bits about what other countries were doing later on (usually when covering WW2).

But, to be fair, I graduated back in the 90s, so maybe things have gotten better since then?

 Ketara wrote:

It's left me wondering if the Italians/Germans are the same as the States in that regard (having only been unified recently).

I suspect Italians and Germans have a national identity which extends beyond political unification. A more interesting case would be Spain, as there is plenty of current animosity regarding Cataluña and Basque Country.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

But, to be fair, I graduated back in the 90s, so maybe things have gotten better since then?

I graduated in 2004, and World History was an AP course at my high school. This meant you had to go through an admissions process in order to take the class.

The not-AP history course was basically just "memorize the Constitution".

I've noticed a trend on these forums and correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the brits know more/are more interested in American politics/history than Americans know about British history/politics. Is this common in England.

yellowfever wrote:
I've noticed a trend on these forums and correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the brits know more/are more interested in American politics/history than Americans know about British history/politics. Is this common in England.

Well it's kinda hard to ignore America's influence in the modern world - it almost makes us look insignificant. I've ended up doing a fair amount of modern American history on a British curriculum, and I believe the American system also teaches more American history than British history.

Mind you, I have studied the Tudors a lot *yawns* gripping stuff

yellowfever wrote:
I've noticed a trend on these forums and correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the brits know more/are more interested in American politics/history than Americans know about British history/politics. Is this common in England.

That isn't just true of these boards. The tour guides we used in D.C. All said a similar thing. During the tours they'd ask questions, looking for a bit of group interaction, and they'd say it was always the foreigners (not necessarily just the Brits) that new most of the answers.

As for differing views with America I'd say it was normal. In the US the pilgrims are made out to be peaceful victims of oppression with the counter view being it was they who were the oppressors who were upset that their extremist activities were no longer tolerated. The war of independence, rather than being a fight for freedom and liberty, was a tax dodge by a small group of elitist slavers. The war of 1812 was an imperialist land grab by the US.

None of these views are accurate from either side of the pond, but they do show a distinct difference in perspective.

Well both are right.

Americans where enslavists and tax dodgers with that mentality

The british where opressors of their rights.

Both side are correct from their point of view. Your view will largely depend on your upbringing/ culture.

Nature virus nurture and all that. I was taught since the day I was born being scottish with small hints of slav blood that you kick punch amd fight til your last breath. Everyone is wrong if you know you are right and you have to do the right thing.

So when I see the history books reffer to barbians and norseman as monsters I see them as heroes fighting for their families to survive.

Warhammer fantasy is a fine example of this.

Bretonia: end times book told how the knights marched day and night and many of their serfs died in the cold but the brave knight moved on. All I read was slaves left to rot for the imbred slavers to prove a point to themselves.

Or how the empire built a wall to keep chaos out, in my opnion a direct translation of british building a wall to keep the celtic out.

Chaos the ones who are so scary evil and do nothing but kill so scary. I read it more as people in a land none should live or survive in fighting the odds to survive. Treated like animals but due what it takes to survive and thrive.

 Ketara wrote:
I don't understand the first post, but working from the title...

I remember when I went over to Adepticon a few years back and was chatting with Alpharius when the subject of predatory animals came up. I mentioned that we'd had wolves and bears in Britain not that long ago, and he asked when that was. "About three hundred years ago for the wolves', I replied, 'and bears were around back with Alfred the Great, so only about a thousand years or so ago for them.'

He burst out laughing at my response, much to my bemusement. When I asked where the mirth sprang from, he laughed again and said that it was funny, ' Because I was talking about periods of time longer than his country had even existed, yet for me it was "not that long ago."' It would appear growing up in a country where you get taught about the wars with Romans over two millennia ago, unification as England one millennia ago, and a reasonably continuous sense of history/identity subsequently gives you something of a certain perspective on historical time spans not mirrored in the States. It's left me wondering if the Italians/Germans are the same as the States in that regard (having only been unified recently).

The US mindset with regards to time is very interesting, and I say that as an American. Particularly the midwest and west coast, with the overwhelmingly vast majority of everything built within living memory. Where I live, 170 years ago there were a few thousand Native Americans spread over an area that now home to over four million that essentially have zero connection to that Native American population, and nothing of that native population remains in terms of structures, towns, etc. The population here has no meaningful connection to anything that was here 200 years ago, and very little of what's here now was here even 60 years ago. For a lot of Americans, the world they live in was essentially constructed from scratch over a couple of lifetimes. To add to that, most of the stuff we interact with everyday was built so recently as to have been built totally around electricty, running water, and the automobile, such that it appears the natural way of things rather than an incredibly recent advent.

Italy and Germany are different in that unification as single states is relatively recent, but have a deep and continuous history in the areas going back thousands of years with many buildings and cities that are hundreds or thousands of years old sitting around today.

It's like that old saying. " In Europe, 100 miles is a long distance, but in America 100 years is a long time." Like seriously, we have active pubs that are 3/4 Times older than your country is.

There is a butcher's shop in Bridport, Dorset that has been running in the same family ownership (allowing for marriages and descent) since the 1500s.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There is a butcher's shop in Bridport, Dorset that has been running in the same family ownership (allowing for marriages and descent) since the 1500s.

A lot of well known Schools are the same - Sherborne School was formed in 1550; I visited it for a trail month, coming from their sister school in Doha. Would not recommend

Point is, examples like this are everywhere in Britain. That does make you think why American history is taught more - I assume it's due to the significance of the events themselves rather than their timeline, although Britain ultimately is responsible for a lot of what we see in the world now as a result of nearly a thousand years of happenings.

G.A

OgreChubbs wrote:

Or how the empire built a wall to keep chaos out, in my opnion a direct translation of british building a wall to keep the celtic out.

When did they do that?

I'm aware of when the Romans did it...

There's a church in nearby town. Its 900 years old, built on site of a 2000 year old roman villa... the cathedral I graduated in is 900, and one of finest gothic examples on earth.

The tower of London has stood nearly 1000 years. And Egypt... Lets not even go there.
Seen Hadrian's wall, castles and houses that predate America...by centuries.

The pub was a place a king surrendered.

It puts quite abit of perspective on things.

Oh, definitely, being surrounded by history certainly lends a different perspective on things, as well. In most of America, everything is less than 100 years old. In Europe, you almost can't throw a rock without hitting something older than 200 years.
I think another difference is the variety and richness in cultures. In Europe, you can travel for a day and pass through how many different nations, with how many different cultural identities and histories? But in America, drive for a day and it's still America, with only the slightest differences (North vs. South, East vs. West, Texas vs. Not Texas). So, in Europe, you have a lot more cultural exposure, I think, than you get in America.

 welshhoppo wrote:
It's like that old saying. " In Europe, 100 miles is a long distance, but in America 100 years is a long time."

This is a pretty apt way of putting it. 100 years here might as well be 10,000 years for all practical purposes, while in Europe 100 miles might take you into a whole different nation, or possibly even cross 2 or 3 in some instances, with different languages and cultures in each whereas some Americans commute that far every day. One of my co-workers commutes 86 miles round trip every day

 General Annoyance wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
I've noticed a trend on these forums and correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the brits know more/are more interested in American politics/history than Americans know about British history/politics. Is this common in England.

Well it's kinda hard to ignore America's influence in the modern world - it almost makes us look insignificant. I've ended up doing a fair amount of modern American history on a British curriculum, and I believe the American system also teaches more American history than British history.

Mind you, I have studied the Tudors a lot *yawns* gripping stuff

We covered a lot of British history when I was in high school. Mostly because I'm from the South, and British history (especially during the Age of Exploration) is highly relevant to American (and my State's) history.

 General Annoyance wrote:

A lot of well known Schools are the same - Sherborne School was formed in 1550; I visited it for a trail month, coming from their sister school in Doha. Would not recommend

There schools in the US dating from the 1600's. Harvard was founded in 1636, and there are a bunch of high schools in the Northeast Corridor that were founded around the same time.

 General Annoyance wrote:

Point is, examples like this are everywhere in Britain. That does make you think why American history is taught more - I assume it's due to the significance of the events themselves rather than their timeline, although Britain ultimately is responsible for a lot of what we see in the world now as a result of nearly a thousand years of happenings.

Britain did start a lot of what is classically taught as American history, at least where I'm from. Though I suspect Spain gets mentioned more South and West of Illinois.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
In most of America, everything is less than 100 years old.

The town I grew up in was founded 186 years ago, but didn't become consumed by suburban sprawl until the 50's; which I think is true of lots of places.

Thanks Roosevelt!

While we certainly don't really have buildings that are as old as those in Europe, we do have some other sorts of structures and historical landmarks that are quite old, such as the Great Serpent Mound. There are a bunch of others too.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
It's like that old saying. " In Europe, 100 miles is a long distance, but in America 100 years is a long time."

This is a pretty apt way of putting it. 100 years here might as well be 10,000 years for all practical purposes, while in Europe 100 miles might take you into a whole different nation, or possibly even cross 2 or 3 in some instances, with different languages and cultures in each whereas some Americans commute that far every day. One of my co-workers commutes 86 miles round trip every day

If anyone around here said they commuted that distance people would think they were mad. About 25 miles is about the max limit of sanity. But sometimes travelling 5 miles can take an hour if the traffic is bad.

But we have had nations that rise and fall in the blink of an eye. Like if you go back 200 years, there have been several different Germany's. The Holy Roman Empire, Kingdom of Prussia, The German Empire, The Weimar Republic of Germany, The Third Reich and finally the German Republic.

 welshhoppo wrote:


But we have had nations that rise and fall in the blink of an eye. Like if you go back 200 years, there have been several different Germany's. The Holy Roman Empire, Kingdom of Prussia, The German Empire, The Weimar Republic of Germany, The Third Reich and finally the German Republic.

Finally ? You sure we couldn't start a new series ?

The US is almost its own continent, Europe provides everyone with lots of neighbours so maybe many Europeans can't think about history and exclude anyone but themselves.

We also had "visitors" from the north and south, the west and the east.

 welshhoppo wrote:

But we have had nations that rise and fall in the blink of an eye. Like if you go back 200 years, there have been several different Germany's. The Holy Roman Empire, Kingdom of Prussia, The German Empire, The Weimar Republic of Germany, The Third Reich and finally the German Republic.

You left out the West and East German divide and then finally the reunited German Republic. The German Socialist Republic was quite a different place to the western part.