It's frightening that this needs to be explained again. There must be something intuitive about condemning people for the sins of their forefathers because it reoccurs so frequently.https://twitter.com/amyalkon/status/944356682548703232 …
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
It's almost unbelievable. It's a way to shame people that they just can't come back from. I mean, what's the answer -- "Sorry, let me just fire up my time machine here, and go back & try to talk great-great-great-great gramps into not being such a murderous asshole"?
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @amyalkon @HPluckrose
Totally agree. But how do US history school syllabuses cover what happened to indigenous peoples, for example?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @shaunjlawson @amyalkon
By covering it. There is no need to add in that people who weren't born at that time should be blamed now.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @amyalkon
How is it covered? In honest, comprehensive detail? Ditto, of course, slavery? There's no need for Germans not around at the time to feel responsible about the Nazis - but they do learn about them and are ruthlessly, rigorously honest with themselves about their nation's past.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @shaunjlawson @amyalkon
Yes and that's what should happen. Surely you see the difference between covering what happened in rigorous, comprehensive detail and blaming people for it who weren't alive then? It's not difficult.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @amyalkon
Yes I do. As I've said in every tweet in this exchange.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So what do you disagree with? Neither of us said history shouldn't be taught honestly, did we?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.