Michael Gove attacks "left-wing" views of WW I

[mistermack]

WW1 aside Gove has an agenda for education. He takes the view that the curriculum has been hijacked by politically correct, left wing revisionists who have re-written history, made everything of equal value and promoted moral relativism. And you know what? He is right (remember who is typing this!), even if his own analysis of history is right wing and jingoistic.

I worked with the teaching profession much of the last 15 years of my career, ultimately in a senior position where I was dealing now and again with union objections to this or that government initiative. A more lazily left wing/protect out arse and fuck any changes anyone suggests group of people I have rarely come across. It is one of the reasons out education outcomes are so crap these days compared to other countries. The teaching profession in the UK is shit despite individually brilliant teachers - most of who just get battered down to forced to join the lowest common denominator.

That may all be true. It certainly comes as no surprise.
But if that's what Gove meant to say, you put it an awful lot better. I would never have got that, from what I've heard him say, or from the quotes on the news.

All I got was that he didn't like the version of history that kids are getting fed, especially the negative aspects of those who actually ran WW2.
I personally think it's healthy for the population to be sceptical of what they are fed by official versions of history. Because an awful lot of it IS bollocks, designed to keep the punters obedient and unquestioning.

[Rum]

Well I was around when the new government came in and it was clear from the policy documents they were sent out to Local Authorities what he was about. My job went shortly after - a consequence of other policies of the new government.

[Jason]

Germans don't change.

Lucky for them they're effectively governing the EU then.

[JimC]

WW1 aside Gove has an agenda for education. He takes the view that the curriculum has been hijacked by politically correct, left wing revisionists who have re-written history, made everything of equal value and promoted moral relativism. And you know what? He is right (remember who is typing this!), even if his own analysis of history is right wing and jingoistic.

I worked with the teaching profession much of the last 15 years of my career, ultimately in a senior position where I was dealing now and again with union objections to this or that government initiative. A more lazily left wing/protect out arse and fuck any changes anyone suggests group of people I have rarely come across. It is one of the reasons out education outcomes are so crap these days compared to other countries. The teaching profession in the UK is shit despite individually brilliant teachers - most of who just get battered down to forced to join the lowest common denominator.

Certainly some truth in that, Rum. It applies to a degree here, although I suspect not as strongly. The humanities curriculum is used as a political football by both sides of politics here, although, IMO, our conservatives are nastier and more blatant about it.

I'm glad I teach senior maths and physics, which is insulated to a fair extent from political foibles. There are no left wing/right wing versions of quadratic equations...

[mistermack]

This is an example of the kind of thing that Michael Gove would like pupils not to read.

The Germans embraced the machine gun from the outset—in 1904, sixteen units were equipped with 'Maschinengewehr'—and the machine gun crews were the elite infantry units; these units were attached to Jaeger (light infantry) battalions. By 1914, British infantry units were armed with two Vickers machine guns per battalion, the Germans had six per battalion, the Russians eight.[35] It would not be until 1917 that every infantry unit of the American forces carried at least one machine gun.[36] After 1915, the Maschinengewehr 08 was the standard issue German machine gun; its number "08/15" entered the German language as idiomatic for "dead plain". At Gallipoli and in Palestine the Turks provided the infantry, but it was usually Germans who manned the machine guns.

The British High Command were less enthusiastic about machine guns, supposedly considering the weapon too "unsporting" and encouraging defensive fighting; and they lagged behind the Germans in adopting it. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig is quoted as saying in 1915, "The machine gun is a much overrated weapon; two per battalion is more than sufficient".[37] The defensive firepower of the machinegun was exemplified during the first day of the Battle of the Somme, 60,000 British soldiers were rendered casualties "the great majority lost under withering machine gun fire".[38] In 1915 the Machine Gun Corps was formed to train and provide sufficient heavy machine gun teams.

[Jason]

./tangent Germans were big on HMGs and LMGs, but it took them until 1943 to adopt a semi-automatic infantry rifle. If they had focused more on infantry weapons (eg. the STG44 would have turned the tide of a lot of infantry battles in their favour) earlier I think things would have been very different. Also the Bren and Sten were crap, especially the Sten.

But why does he object to reading about history?

[Audley Strange]

WW1 aside Gove has an agenda for education. He takes the view that the curriculum has been hijacked by politically correct, left wing revisionists who have re-written history, made everything of equal value and promoted moral relativism. And you know what? He is right (remember who is typing this!), even if his own analysis of history is right wing and jingoistic.

I worked with the teaching profession much of the last 15 years of my career, ultimately in a senior position where I was dealing now and again with union objections to this or that government initiative. A more lazily left wing/protect out arse and fuck any changes anyone suggests group of people I have rarely come across. It is one of the reasons out education outcomes are so crap these days compared to other countries. The teaching profession in the UK is shit despite individually brilliant teachers - most of who just get battered down to forced to join the lowest common denominator.

I've always agreed with you on this, but I think this is the first time you've actually agreed with me or at least been so enthusiastic in your criticisms of the "loony left" as they were once called before they became mainstream

However my mother told me the other day that during the Suez Crisis her teacher often referred to the Egyptians as "filthy wogs" and that another told the class that Irish Catholic children were in different schools because they were mentally retarded. So perhaps we're better away from that kind of education. In saying that It's rarer to find someone defending the First World War than it is to find people defending Ian Huntley, so I don't know why Gove is fixating on that and tying it in with patriotism and honour, which are, in this time and place archaic.

The main problem is that with the education system being prone to the whims of ideologically opposed governments, it can't escape influence from such loons from all over the political pyramid influencing what it taught and how and why. The idea of privatisation is currently unthinkable in our society, so the only other option seems to be an Education Quango. I'm not sure that would go down well either. So we are going to be left with this half assed lefty malaise until someone with gumption roots them all out. Funnily enough I have more hope that it will come from the left (who it seems to me are becoming more and more "OFFICIALLY SICK OF THIS SHIT" within their own ranks) than the right who can and do use it at every opportunity to make the left look idiotic while they use it as a pretext get rid of comprehensive education entirely.

However I think Gove picked a foolish example to attack and in doing so revealed himself to be an absolute clod. He might as well have made a defence in favour of the radiation at Fukushima.

[Blind groper]

To me, the more important issue is this silly veneration of "patriotism, honour and courage."

Patriotism is what sends men blindly into battle to get killed for some other guy's selfish agenda. Honour is what killed thousands of men in ridiculous duels. Courage is the thing that drives a soldier into machine gun fire, instead of sensibly hiding behind a rock and staying alive.

Much more important than those obsolete virtues is simple reason. The ability to think of a better way of achieving your goals without inflicting megadeath.

John F. Kennedy was one of the most intelligent (measured by IQ tests) presidents America ever had. He found himself faced with the megadeath scenario with the Cuba missile crisis. He and his 'opponent', Krushchev, used their brains and found a way to avoid conflict. I dread to think what would have happened if a low IQ president, like Dubya, were in charge!

[klr]

I am pretty much self-read as far as my knowledge of history goes, but I accept that it's very important to have a good history curriculum at school, especially given how little interest most people take in history. Their perceptions of history (such as they are) could be very strongly molded by whatever they were taught in school. So Gove is right to be concerned about it, even if I only share some of his actual opinions.

[mistermack]

I would like to see pupils taught to question everything that they read, whether it's left wing or right wing. Almost every author has their own agenda, their own prejudices. Looking at what they are trying to do is almost as important as the facts that they include.
They should be looking between the lines of everything. I've always done that. Because you're very unlikely to be reading an unbiased account.

I remember reading one glowing account of Winston Churchill's WW1 record, with a gushing account of how he was loved by the men under his command.
Then later on, I read another bit, about how someone of his status would not be sent over the top, because of the lift it would give to the enemy if that kind of famous aristocrat was to be killed.

So Churchill's men knew that as long as he was with them, they weren't going to have to go over the top against machine gun fire. Now wonder they hero-worshiped him. So would I, if I was in their shoes.
But that sort of thing isn't mentioned anywhere. You have to take information from where you find it, and come to your own conclusion.

[Audley Strange]

John F. Kennedy was one of the most intelligent (measured by IQ tests) presidents America ever had. He found himself faced with the megadeath scenario with the Cuba missile crisis. He and his 'opponent', Krushchev, used their brains and found a way to avoid conflict. I dread to think what would have happened if a low IQ president, like Dubya, were in charge!

I like the way you framed that. The two most heavily armed nations on earth almost brought the entire planet to destruction with that fucking mess and I'm meant to applause the leaders of those regimes that played brinkmanship to the eleventh hour because they, through luck more than anything, didn't?

[mistermack]

Actually, the Cuba crisis is a good example of why you shouldn't believe what you are taught about history in school.
How many American schools actually inform their pupils of the true deal that was struck in the Cuba crisis? Probably none.
It's not widely acknowledged even now, by the US media. They still sell it as a showdown that America won, with the Soviets backing down and Kennedy ''refusing to blink''.

In the UK though, history is generally written by right-wing jingoists, so I'm generally sympathetic to the left wing shaking the apple cart. They are almost certainly giving a more truthful account than the so-called official historians.

[rainbow]

This is an example of the kind of thing that Michael Gove would like pupils not to read.

The Germans embraced the machine gun from the outset—in 1904, sixteen units were equipped with 'Maschinengewehr'—and the machine gun crews were the elite infantry units; these units were attached to Jaeger (light infantry) battalions. By 1914, British infantry units were armed with two Vickers machine guns per battalion, the Germans had six per battalion, the Russians eight.[35] It would not be until 1917 that every infantry unit of the American forces carried at least one machine gun.[36] After 1915, the Maschinengewehr 08 was the standard issue German machine gun; its number "08/15" entered the German language as idiomatic for "dead plain". At Gallipoli and in Palestine the Turks provided the infantry, but it was usually Germans who manned the machine guns.

The British High Command were less enthusiastic about machine guns, supposedly considering the weapon too "unsporting" and encouraging defensive fighting; and they lagged behind the Germans in adopting it. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig is quoted as saying in 1915, "The machine gun is a much overrated weapon; two per battalion is more than sufficient".[37] The defensive firepower of the machinegun was exemplified during the first day of the Battle of the Somme, 60,000 British soldiers were rendered casualties "the great majority lost under withering machine gun fire".[38] In 1915 the Machine Gun Corps was formed to train and provide sufficient heavy machine gun teams.

Many years ago I went to some Tank Museum in Dorset, Soggy Island. They had a mock-up of the trenches, show both the German and Allied sides. The idea was that the Germans were way ahead, and winning - and then the boffs invented the tank, turning the tide as it were, saving the Tommies' butts.
I have no idea if this is an accurate picture of what actually happened..

[Brian Peacock]

A somewhat predictable move by the UK education secretary:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25612369

Blackadder star Sir Tony Robinson in Michael Gove WW1 row

A row has erupted between Sir Tony Robinson and Michael Gove after the education secretary claimed "left-wing academics" were using Blackadder "to feed myths" about World War One.

Sir Tony, who played Baldrick in the BBC series, said Mr Gove was essentially "slagging off teachers".

But Mr Gove said Sir Tony - a left wing activist - was "wrong" and he had not been attacking teachers, just "myths".

The row comes ahead of centenary commemorations for the outbreak of WW1.

The final series of Blackadder - set in the trenches of WW1 - depicts Britain's military leaders as cowards and buffoons, in common with earlier fictional accounts of the conflict such as the 1960s musical farce Oh, What a Lovely War!

'Catastrophic mistakes'

Mr Gove told the Daily Mail on Thursday, that people's understanding of the war had been overlaid by "misrepresentations" which at worst reflected "an unhappy compulsion on the part of some to denigrate virtues such as patriotism, honour and courage".

"The war was, of course, an unspeakable tragedy, which robbed this nation of our bravest and best," wrote Mr Gove.

"But even as we recall that loss and commemorate the bravery of those who fought, it's important that we don't succumb to some of the myths which have grown up about the conflict."

He added: "The conflict has, for many, been seen through the fictional prism of dramas such as Oh, What a Lovely War!, The Monocled Mutineer and Blackadder, as a misbegotten shambles - a series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite.

"Even to this day there are left-wing academics all too happy to feed those myths."

Some scenes in Oh, What a Lovely War! were based on historian and Conservative politician Alan Clark's revisionist history of WW1, The Donkeys, which is credited with starting the trend for unflattering portrayals of WW1 top brass.

Speaking to Sky News on Sunday, Sir Tony, a former member of Labour's ruling National Executive Committee, said: "I think Mr Gove has just made a very silly mistake; it's not that Blackadder teaches children the First World War.

"When imaginative teachers bring it in, it's simply another teaching tool; they probably take them over to Flanders to have a look at the sights out there, have them marching around the playground, read the poems of Wilfred Owen to them. And one of the things that they'll do is show them Blackadder.

"And I think to make this mistake, to categorise teachers who would introduce something like Blackadder as left-wing and introducing left-wing propaganda is very, very unhelpful. And I think it's particularly unhelpful and irresponsible for a minister in charge of education."

The actor and Labour activist said it was "just another example of slagging off teachers," adding: "I don't think that's professional or appropriate."

But a spokesman for Michael Gove hit back at his comments.

"Tony Robinson is wrong. Michael wasn't attacking teachers, he was attacking the myths perpetuated in Blackadder and elsewhere," said the spokesman.

"Michael thinks it is important not to denigrate the patriotism, honour and courage demonstrated by ordinary British soldiers in the First World War."

Paxman comments

Earlier, shadow education secretary and TV historian Tristram Hunt also criticised Mr Gove's "crass" comments.

In an article in The Observer, the Labour MP wrote: "The reality is clear: the government is using what should be a moment for national reflection and respectful debate to rewrite the historical record and sow political division."

In October, BBC Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman, who has written a book to tie in with the centenary of the start of WW1, criticised schools for relying on episodes of Blackadder Goes Forth to teach pupils about the conflict.

The following month, Conservative defence minister Andrew Murrison, a former Royal Navy surgeon, said: "We risk disconnection from a defining event of our time and an opportunity, perhaps, to balance the Oh! What A Lovely War/Blackadder take on history, that has sadly been in the ascendant for the past 50 years."

Maybe he ought to read somemore history instead of telling people what to think.

That's the point though klr, Gove is manufacturing a particular reading of the hitorical narrative, one authorised and endorsed by, and one that conforms to, New Tory ideology. The idea that class elavated the well-to-do to positions of power beyond the level of their ability is not something the current Eton and aspiring elites want young people to even encounter, let alone engage with.

Arsehole.

[Brian Peacock]

A somewhat predictable move by the UK education secretary:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25612369

Blackadder star Sir Tony Robinson in Michael Gove WW1 row

A row has erupted between Sir Tony Robinson and Michael Gove after the education secretary claimed "left-wing academics" were using Blackadder "to feed myths" about World War One.

Sir Tony, who played Baldrick in the BBC series, said Mr Gove was essentially "slagging off teachers".

But Mr Gove said Sir Tony - a left wing activist - was "wrong" and he had not been attacking teachers, just "myths".

The row comes ahead of centenary commemorations for the outbreak of WW1.

The final series of Blackadder - set in the trenches of WW1 - depicts Britain's military leaders as cowards and buffoons, in common with earlier fictional accounts of the conflict such as the 1960s musical farce Oh, What a Lovely War!

'Catastrophic mistakes'

Mr Gove told the Daily Mail on Thursday, that people's understanding of the war had been overlaid by "misrepresentations" which at worst reflected "an unhappy compulsion on the part of some to denigrate virtues such as patriotism, honour and courage".

"The war was, of course, an unspeakable tragedy, which robbed this nation of our bravest and best," wrote Mr Gove.

"But even as we recall that loss and commemorate the bravery of those who fought, it's important that we don't succumb to some of the myths which have grown up about the conflict."

He added: "The conflict has, for many, been seen through the fictional prism of dramas such as Oh, What a Lovely War!, The Monocled Mutineer and Blackadder, as a misbegotten shambles - a series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite.

"Even to this day there are left-wing academics all too happy to feed those myths."

Some scenes in Oh, What a Lovely War! were based on historian and Conservative politician Alan Clark's revisionist history of WW1, The Donkeys, which is credited with starting the trend for unflattering portrayals of WW1 top brass.

Speaking to Sky News on Sunday, Sir Tony, a former member of Labour's ruling National Executive Committee, said: "I think Mr Gove has just made a very silly mistake; it's not that Blackadder teaches children the First World War.

"When imaginative teachers bring it in, it's simply another teaching tool; they probably take them over to Flanders to have a look at the sights out there, have them marching around the playground, read the poems of Wilfred Owen to them. And one of the things that they'll do is show them Blackadder.

"And I think to make this mistake, to categorise teachers who would introduce something like Blackadder as left-wing and introducing left-wing propaganda is very, very unhelpful. And I think it's particularly unhelpful and irresponsible for a minister in charge of education."

The actor and Labour activist said it was "just another example of slagging off teachers," adding: "I don't think that's professional or appropriate."

But a spokesman for Michael Gove hit back at his comments.

"Tony Robinson is wrong. Michael wasn't attacking teachers, he was attacking the myths perpetuated in Blackadder and elsewhere," said the spokesman.

"Michael thinks it is important not to denigrate the patriotism, honour and courage demonstrated by ordinary British soldiers in the First World War."

Paxman comments

Earlier, shadow education secretary and TV historian Tristram Hunt also criticised Mr Gove's "crass" comments.

In an article in The Observer, the Labour MP wrote: "The reality is clear: the government is using what should be a moment for national reflection and respectful debate to rewrite the historical record and sow political division."

In October, BBC Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman, who has written a book to tie in with the centenary of the start of WW1, criticised schools for relying on episodes of Blackadder Goes Forth to teach pupils about the conflict.

The following month, Conservative defence minister Andrew Murrison, a former Royal Navy surgeon, said: "We risk disconnection from a defining event of our time and an opportunity, perhaps, to balance the Oh! What A Lovely War/Blackadder take on history, that has sadly been in the ascendant for the past 50 years."

Maybe he ought to read somemore history instead of telling people what to think.

That's the point though klr, Gove is manufacturing a particular reading of the hitorical narrative, one authorised and endorsed by, and one that conforms to, New Tory ideology. The idea that class elavated the well-to-do to positions of power beyond the level of their ability is not something the current Eton and aspiring elites want young people to even encounter, let alone engage with.

Arsehole.