Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - McCullough

In response to Here's the link for American History at Suite101. posted by pink101:

David McCullough, a GREAT historian and author who has won the Pulitzer TWICE (unheard of), has some excellent suggestions in reforming how history is taught in our schools.

One of his best suggestions - which I would apply across the board (not just in history) were it not for the NEA - is to deemphasize education degrees and hire teachers who actually have experience and scholarship in the FIELD of history!! This seems like a no-brainer, but most history teachers are not academic or professional historians. Their credentials consist of education degrees and/or teaching certifications w/ a few history classes included in that - and passage of a PRAXIS test focused on history. That's not good enough.

Another problem that he points out is with parents. Turn off the TV, he says (and I agree) and talk to your kids about history. Take them to the battlefields, the museums, and the historic sites. Let them experience history. I applaud this 100%, because that's how my dad and granddad cultivated a love of history in me!

I urge you to incorporate Mr. McCullough into your studies on this issue.

» pink101 - McCullough

In response to McCullough posted by BrianTubbs:
.
An extensive study of a variety of resources is out of the question for where I am at at this time on the task that is set before me--to write a 400 word article on the controversy.
.
More to the point, my present efforts will establish a kind of a "talking point" platform from which I can go deeper into the subject.
.
By the way, you refreshed my mind on the idea of praxis. I don't use that word very often and have been trying to recall it. And, bingo! You put it in your last post. So, thanks. I am on a praxis.
.
I see the major problem as being the foundation upon which America was built. And, in how that comes into direct conflict with the idea that we owe our existence to leaders like George Washington. This issue is a life and death issue for America. There is not a single doubt of that in my mind.
.
I will get a copy of McCullough's, 1776, and read it carefully. Thanks for getting me to spend some more money.
.
:)
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - McCullough

In response to McCullough posted by pink101:
.
I'm reading David Hackett Fischer now.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - McCullough

In response to McCullough posted by pink101:

Yes, Fisher's Washington's Crossing is excellent! Also...George Washington's War by Bruce Chadwick.

ALTHOUGH...YOU would probably more prefer Chadwick's The First American Army which focuses on the common soldier - not so much the commanders. And, of course, there's the classic autobiographical narrative by Joseph Plumb Martin. If you haven't read that, you're missing out.

So...you see...I am not totally fixated on the leaders, including GW. Heck, I've even read Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and part of Ray Raphael's A People's History of the American Revolution.

» pink101 - Liberty and Freedom

In response to McCullough posted by BrianTubbs:
.
I'm reading Fischer's Liberty and Freedom
.
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Freedom-Am...
.
Later.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - George Washington

.
While I do not believe that the United States was dependant on George Washington, if we were to proceed on the basis of the thinking that certain prime movers are responsible, a pretty good case could be made that Thomas Paine was the one person so responsible.
.
In January of 1776, his pamphlet, Common Sense was published and it was the crystalizing and singular event that changed the minds of the American people against the monarchy. My source for the date and public opinion is David Hackett Fischer's book cited above.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Prime movers

In response to George Washington posted by pink101:

Sam Adams (first) and Patrick Henry (second) were the two individuals most responsible for stirring up organized dissent and colonial resistance to the British government. Really Sam Adams much more so than Henry.

Then, Thomas Paine was the one most responsible in pushing us toward independence. Prior to Common Sense, the colonies were evenly divided over whether to declare independence. In fact, Sam Adams and company were still likely in the minority. Paine changed that. He started a torrent that resulted in the Declaration of Independence.

By the end of the Revolution, however, Paine's influence has greatly diminished. With the Constitution, it was non-existent. And in the 1790s, he was, if anything, COUNTER to the flow of the Republic.

» pink101 - Prime movers

In response to Prime movers posted by BrianTubbs:
.
So, Ol' Tom was the one who lit the fuse. Supposing he hadn't done that and some Loyalists had been able to influence Geo III to loosen up?
.
Personally, I think America was an experience the time for which had come regardless of the individuals including his excellency, our great leader, George Washington.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - GW

In response to Prime movers posted by pink101:

It's not hard to speculate on the what-if you've put forward. If not for George Washington, here's how I think it would have played out...

Everything up until 1775 would've been more or less the same. Bad policies from Britain. Unrest at home. Tension. Turmoil. War. And on from there. Sam Adams, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Paine would've all played their key parts.
However, in the summer of 1775 after Lexington and Concord, who would the Continental Congress have turned to other than GW? The answer would be probably John Hancock (who desperately wanted the job), Horatio Gates or Charles Lee. Just about any historian will tell you that. Take your pick. Gates and Lee turned out to be disasters in the RevWar. (Gates got lucky at Saratoga, but disgraced himself later). Hard to say with Hancock, but he did not have the military experience, leadership skill, or character that Washington possessed. That much is certain.

So, you'd have one of those three leading our Continental Army as we head into 1776. Let's say that they still somehow enjoy enough success to set the stage for...

Paine's Common Sense then would touch off the wave for independence that it did.

Then, in the summer of 1776, the Continentals declare independence.

So, basically, Pink, you're right insofar as the start of the RevWar and the declaration of independence go. The war would have started in 1775 - with or without George Washington. And independence would've been declared in the summer of 1776 - with or without George Washington.

» pink101 - GW

In response to GW posted by BrianTubbs:
.
But, I agree that George Washington was an extraordinary human being who was greatly instumental in the development of our nation.
.
In those days, Americans were greatly influenced by icons and as an Icon, the Father of Our Country was First in the Hearts of His Countrymen--First among equals who carriage quite a visage if we are to believe our historians. I'm sure he was.
.
Fischer makes the times come alive. One of his points has to do with Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, and Madison who he sees as the four major politicians of the day. And, he points out how they have been brought up from time to time throughout the ensuing years both negatively and positively. He cites the time between the 1930s and the 1940s as one of those time in perspective during the rise of fascism in Europe. I attended a one room rural school house in Michigan during the second half of the 1930s. And, our teacher made it seem as though those men almost must have lived just down the road from where we lived. We were close to the colonial days in 1930s rural America--moreso that I think we realize today. Farmers still used horses to plow their fields.
.

-- posted by pink101