Canadians losing knowledge of military history

[spud]

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20061110%2fremember_quiz_061110&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True

This is bad:

In a multiple choice quiz, only 33 per cent of those quizzed identified First World War commander Sir Arthur Currie and legendary flying ace Billy Bishop as Canadian military heroes from a list of only four. The other two names on the list belonged to U.S. Civil War leader Ulysses S. Grant and American Gen. Douglas MacArthur.

And this is even worse:

And one quarter of those surveyed picked MacArthur as a Canadian war hero.

What a shame.

potato

 

[Inspir]

Going through junior and senior high we were all required to have a basic understanding of Canadian military history. I'm not sure if they even do that anymore  ???

 

[Korus]

I got in trouble in the sixth grade for drawing a cartoon tank. I guess for my schooling at least, all my schools and teachers figured that we didn't really need to learn about anything to make us proud of our military history, or even much about the specifics of our military history. (Mostly just general history of the wars)

Then I joined the Army. Go figure.

 

[Jantor]

I'm not that surprised. When I went to school, the seventies, I learned more about our military history in an evening at the city library than I ever did in school.

 

[McG]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061110/remember_quiz_061110/20061110?hub=TopStories

"If you compare them with similar polls in the past, there is a decline in knowledge and a decline in Remembrance Day commitment," Griffiths told The Globe and Mail.

"This is a dangerous moment [for Remembrance Day], as we move from a society that still has living links to the experience of war to generations who no longer have that direct, living link."

It seems to me that we are establishing "living links" in Afghanistan today.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I pissed off the teacher by pointing out erors in the text book! My daughter is goingto learn about Vimy, Ortano, korea, Medak pocket and Panajiwal (sorry if I got the spelling wrong) and how to use a gun safely.

 

[pipesnake]

The point should also be made that there needs to be as an objective teaching of the history as possible. This seems obvious however the Boer War may be an example of this perhaps not being the case. When I was in the RCR we used to celebrate Paardeberg day. It wasn't until I left and did some reading on my own that I found out the British Empire essentially invaded to take the gold in South Africa, that we practised a scorched earth policy of utter destruction to deny the Boer's natural resources, and that we, being the British Empire, established concentration camps where thousands of men, women and children died of starvation and disease. Not exactly the kind of information you learn in history class and somewhat humbling to know that we may have been in some sense, "the bad guys" (admittedly debateable).

Anyways just another perspective which I hope does not offend but perhaps enlightens...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

Pro Patria

 

[Journeyman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

While I'm not going to debate the topic itself, I'd like to point out that your source has been "edited" 58 times in the past 30 days - - obviously a contentious issue. Wikipedia may not be the best source for history.

 

[pipesnake]

That wasn't my original source. I read a book some place, can't remember the name, and saw an excellent documentary on TV. I just posted that link so people could get some more info.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The point should also be made that there needs to be as an objective teaching of the history as possible. This seems obvious however the Boer War may be an example of this perhaps not being the case. When I was in the RCR we used to celebrate Paardeberg day. It wasn't until I left and did some reading on my own that I found out the British Empire essentially invaded to take the gold in South Africa, that we practised a scorched earth policy of utter destruction to deny the Boer's natural resources, and that we, being the British Empire, established concentration camps where thousands of men, women and children died of starvation and disease. Not exactly the kind of information you learn in history class and somewhat humbling to know that we may have been in some sense, "the bad guys" (admittedly debateable).

Anyways just another perspective which I hope does not offend but perhaps enlightens...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

Pro Patria

Of course the blacks there considered everyone else to be the bad guys, Were the british any better or worse to the blacks than the Boers?

 

[Old Sweat]

Pipesnake,

In very general terms you are correct, except that the Boers initiated hostilities by means of an ultimatum followed by an invasion. The removal of the population from the veldt along with the confiscation of the livestock and destruction of the crops was a standard counter-insurgency practice of the time. That it raised the ire of the 'western' was because the Boers were white, not because they were victms. It was a nasty time and one that operated by rules we would have trouble understanding, but the British were by no means the worst transgressors of the late-nineteenth century in this regard.

In my opinion the overall cause of the war was strategic. The Boers posed a threat to British control of the Cape of Good Hope with all that that meant for naval domination. Gold and diamonds may have come second, but there also was the Imperial imperative of creating a 'red' corridor up the length of Africa. Why? Maybe just because they could.

 

[Trinity]

Oh...

its all my fault.

I dropped my OPME this term on Canadian Military history.

:-[

 

[Armymedic]

My take...

Yeah, whatever.

Its something that is a nice to know, but not a must know. It's like listing the winners of the Stanley Cup...does it make me less of a Canadian if I don't know who won it in 1956 (Montreal...ok poor example)?

 

[ex-Sup]

I guess it just depends on who your teacher is. As a teacher and dept head, I have many different teachers with very different backgrounds in my history dept. Not all of them are like me; ex-reservist and decent background in military history (plus I'm a bit of an enthusiast). Most teachers will cover the basics, but I don't think they have enough knowledge to be any sort of expert. On a personal note, I do the best that I can within the constraints of the curriculum. 

 

[ex-Sup]

Yeah, whatever.

Sounds like some of my students!

 

[Trinity]

I guess it just depends on who your teacher is. As a teacher and dept head, I have many different teachers with very different backgrounds in my history dept. Not all of them are like me; ex-reservist and decent background in military history (plus I'm a bit of an enthusiast). Most teachers will cover the basics, but I don't think they have enough knowledge to be any sort of expert. On a personal note, I do the best that I can within the constraints of the curriculum. 

I wish i was taking it at RMC at class... I was doing the WEB CT program.

Didn't work well with my style of learning... (you mean I have to READ??)

Life got to busy to do all the readings.

 

[ex-Sup]

I wish i was taking it at RMC at class... I was doing the WEB CT program.

Didn't work well with my style of learning... (you mean I have to READ??)

Life got to busy to do all the readings.

I'm there right with you...I've taken 6 university classes in the past 3 years, all of them web ct (Lakehead & Laurier). It's a real pain trying to do tht all while working full-time, having a family, running a huge dept and coaching football. All so I can get qualified to do the job I've BEEN doing for the past 3 years. Never mind the $$$$ that I spent.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Dugout Doug, Victor of Vimy
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/11/dugout-doug-victor-of-vimy.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[a_majoor]

This problem extends to Remembrance Day

http://ve1jh.blogspot.com/2006/11/remembrance-day-who-owes-who.html

Remembrance Day, who owes who?

As published in the Miramichi Weekend, 10 November 2006

The Boer War in Southern Africa is so long ago that there is nobody left on Earth who remembered it. It now exists only in history books and documents. The stories of the 267 Canadians who died in that conflict, and the very reason for the fighting in the first place, is lost to practically all of us. Time marches on.

The very few remaining World War I veterans are well over 100. Most of the thousands of remaining World War II veterans are well into their 80s. Korean War veterans are long past retirement age, and Canada is quickly becoming a country that does not know the fear of how losing on the battlefield could mean the end of its way of life.

Yes, we have lost soldiers since Korea. We are losing them right now in Afghanistan, and every death of a Canadian soldier is a devastating blow. The engagements we are involved in now are no less important to the continuation of our way of life, but it has become harder to equate our victories and defeats with measurable changes in our society.

If we have a bad day in Afghanistan, the lights stay on and country keeps running. We see some news footage, and it renews the debate about why we are there, but the hockey games continue to be played, and the grocery shelves remain stocked. There is a disconnection between our dieing, and our living.

Ordinary Canadians of my generation are well aware of the sacrifices made by our sailors, airmen, soldiers, and their families, but we don’t really know what it must have been like to be home in Canada - hanging on every word of every newspaper article and radio broadcast, praying that our troops would prevail and we would win a decisive victory over the enemy.

During the two world wars we threw everything at the enemy. We threw practically the entire output of our economy, we threw considerable forbearance, and we threw our young men and women into battle with the full knowledge that many of them would not return.

The sacrifices made by our soldiers on the battlefield were matched by the sacrifices made by Canadians at home. Through lifestyle changes, rationing, blackout drills, munitions production, and human loss, every Canadian was fighting totalitarianism. That is not the case with our current military action. We are not all sacrificing and fighting to the same degree.

But that does not diminish the importance of our mission in Asia. The Taliban want us all dead and our civilization destroyed. If they are allowed to acquire power and weapons and the ability to take the fight to our shores, they will.

Tomorrow, we are adding new names to the rolls – killed in action since last year. It is vital that we remember their sacrifice, and that we remember it in everything we do.

Every Remembrance Day, I reflect most intently on those who never came home – those tens of thousands of Canadians who died never knowing if we won the war or not. Many of them undoubtedly died thinking that all was lost, and their last thoughts were certainly of their loved ones back home and the bleak future they might be facing.

We are lucky that it has now been over 60 years since we engaged an enemy on the battlefield that had the power to enslave us and our children for all time. But those six decades of relative security have made many of us complacent, and have allowed many of us to forget how very important the gift given by our soldiers is.

The motto of Remembrance Day, “Lest we forget,” is proving to be more important each year. It’s more important because we get older and less able to pass on our memories to those who are following us.

Despite good attendance at Remembrance Day ceremonies, we are reaching the stage where we, as a society, are forgetting the reality of war and how important winning those wars was. Despite the efforts of schools and churches and other institutions, we are losing our ability to transmit the seriousness of remembrance down to our youngest generation.

Remembrance Day is now, for some, just another holiday. And, when Remembrance Day falls on a weekend as it does this year, it is even harder to convince the public that it is not jut another day off.

This year, many of us will have next Monday off. Why? What does Monday have to do with anything? The true day for remembrance is November 11, and that happens to fall tomorrow. Everything should stop tomorrow at 11 a.m., and then life should resume when our remembrance and reflection is done.

I think if we are to truly honour Remembrance Day we should give it the complete respect it deserves – whenever it falls – and not treat it as a public holiday where government and public sectors get a “free” day off on those occasions where November 11 happens to be on a weekend.

In doing so, have we not inadvertently cast Remembrance Day as a day off that is owed to us, instead of a day that we owe to the fallen?

 

[Cliff]

I'm not that surprised. When I went to school, the seventies, I learned more about our military history in an evening at the city library than I ever did in school.

That's because many of the WW2 vets were still around in the 1970's and there was a deep appreciation for the miltary. Somehow, things took a turn for the worse.