Saturday, September 12, 2015

Rethinking History in a Post 9/11 World

Since we ran out of time yesterday in class, I would like you all to finish the discussion here.  Do you agree or disagree with Foner's argument? What part of Foner's essay, in any, resonated with you the most? I would like you to write your own response, as well as a response to someone else's. Discuss! 
Posted by at

13 comments:

  1. UnknownSeptember 14, 2015 at 7:51 PM

    I agree with Eric Foner's argument. I believe that America should reflect on its place in the world and reject that idea that it is an an isolated country, exempted from violence and attacks. Just like Foner, I believe that American should use 9/11 as a teaching opportunity. Americans should capitalize on the event to understand the country's relationship with the rest of the world, as well as to learn how to prevent an event as horrific as 9/11 from ever happening again. I think Foner really nailed his point when he said, "The difference between positing civilizations with unchanging essences and analyzing change within and interactions between various societies is the difference between thinking mythically and thinking historically." Through this statement, he demonstrates how essential it is to analyze the relationships that societies have between one another, as well as to study why changes between those relationships occur. I believe if America follows that notion, it will be able to better understand its place in the world, understand the societies that surround it, and disclaim the dangerous false conceptions that it has of certain societies, cultures, religions, and groups.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousSeptember 15, 2015 at 9:13 AM

      I agree with you, In my opinion his strongest argument was that americans should use 9/11 as a teaching opportunity, this is because we get to have a better understanding of the concept hopefully without a bias opinion.

      Delete
    2. UnknownSeptember 16, 2015 at 7:47 PM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. UnknownSeptember 16, 2015 at 7:49 PM

      I agree Diana, American History, taught at our schools, is so surrounded around the United States and its involvement in certain events. We rarely see the other side's point of view on these events and how they were effected by such happenings. Students should know all sides of the story and establish their own opinions on historical events. Sadly, however, history is bias and it is unlikely that the history books will ever present both sides of the story and not surround all history around the United States.

      Delete
  2. AnonymousSeptember 15, 2015 at 9:24 AM

    My favorite line has to be "In the aftermath of 9/11, freedom became an all purpose explanation for both the attack and the ensuing war against "terrorism". freedom itself is under attack". This is because in just 2 sentences president Bush describe the reason why everything was happening. We were attack by Al-quaeda because they don't think like us as us, and we went to war to try and protect our freedom. This goes to show that freedom can be something good but also something that can cause the lives if thousands of people.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownSeptember 16, 2015 at 8:01 PM

    Forner's argument that resinated the most with me was through american politics we have this credulous that in time of war it is appropriate to repress someone's rights and that civil liberties doesn't extend to everyone. And given the fact that this mostly pertains to immigrants is quite racist. I also agree with Diana when she highlighted Forner's assertions about changing america's ideologies as an isolated country. The ignorance we have towards the middle east directly encourage the abundant amount of racism present. We need to teach that its okay to be a secular based country not all the hostility also that its not necessarily our job to spread democracy.
    - Zaire Gale

    ReplyDelete
  4. UnknownSeptember 16, 2015 at 8:05 PM

    A quote from the reading that resonates with me is, "No idea is more quintessentially American than freedom. And throughout our history, in moments of crisis, the question of freedom -- what it is, why it is worth defending, who should enjoy it -- seems to come to the fore." I'm with Foner when I ask, What is freedom? It seems to me that freedom doesn't have a definite meaning. The idea of freedom can change with certain circumstances. So, when freedom became the purpose for commencing the war on terror, what exactly was the United States fighting to protect? Is war freedom?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownSeptember 30, 2015 at 3:54 PM

      I agree with your statement that during times of crisis no matter how big or small, the freedom of the people will always be limited. The people might not agree to the changes but the idea is to secure the nation and the people. I believe that it is worth defending because all people would benefit from it whether they like it or not. The United States fights to protect the people ideally but also to maintain its way of being and how it is governed.

      - Bianca Mestiza

      Delete
  5. UnknownSeptember 25, 2015 at 2:34 PM

    I agree with Foner's argument. I think that America should learn from it's mistakes and should also learn from other countries mistakes too. By doing so this can help improve our country, save us money and not go to war all the time and lastly help us not repeat the same mistakes over again. In other words I agree with Diana.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownSeptember 26, 2015 at 12:33 PM

      I agree, in other words, history repeats itself. I do think that America to an extent learns from its mistakes, but goes about it the wrong way.

      Delete
  6. UnknownSeptember 26, 2015 at 12:28 PM

    I agree with Eric Foner's argument, that history should be taught as a debate, and should be a learning opportunity. The quote that resonates with me the most is, "Critical intellectual analysis is our responsibility -- to ourselves and to our students. Explanation is not a justification for murder, criticism is not equivalent to treason, and offering a historical analysis of evil is not the same thing as consorting with evil." Historical events produce different sides and different opinions, which should be expressed and taught instead of America's self absorbed way of teaching.

    ReplyDelete
  7. UnknownSeptember 30, 2015 at 4:13 PM

    I agree with Foner's argument that history should be able to teach the people and have new presented ideas that will make the country better. in the article Foner states that "The very ubiquity today of the language of freedom suggests that we need to equipped students to understand the many meanings freedom has had the many uses to which it has been put over the course of our history." What I got from this statement was that freedom can be interpreted in many ways and it can never be taught specifically.

    ReplyDelete
  8. UnknownSeptember 30, 2015 at 4:13 PM

    I agree with Foner's argument that history should be able to teach the people and have new presented ideas that will make the country better. in the article Foner states that "The very ubiquity today of the language of freedom suggests that we need to equipped students to understand the many meanings freedom has had the many uses to which it has been put over the course of our history." What I got from this statement was that freedom can be interpreted in many ways and it can never be taught specifically.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)