Thread: Russia & UK from 6th History Class - Comments?

So, my sixth grader came home last night with a summary page of several countries “The Economic – Political Connection” and asked me if the summary was true about Russia. I also noticed one about the UK and as we have many people on the forum from the UK, I figured I would post both of them and ask for your feedback and comments.

Just so you know... this information was written by the County School System in 2007, and NOT the teacher or from a text book.

Please try to respond in English if you can… if not… would someone please translate any Russian for me?

Thanks, Rockzmom

Russia (R)
Russia was previously known as the Soviet Union and had an authoritarian Communist government. In 1991 the Soviet command economy fell apart and government leaders lost power as new leaders came to power. Since then, the nation has been experimenting with democracy and a market economy. However, many industries are still owned by the government and people expect the government to provide health care and other services they were used to having under Communism. The Russian economy has struggled to prosper with its new mixed-market system and recently the new president of Russia has been enforcing laws that limit freedom of the press

United Kingdom (UK)
The United Kingdom, better known as Britain, has a long tradition of democracy and a market economy. However, in the 1950s, leaders were elected who promised to provide more services to the poor. The British government-run soon took over all health care and many other industries such as railroads. In the 1980s, people complained that the government-run industries and services were not doing a good enough job. Recently, the British government returned some of these industries to private ownership. The debate goes on in democratic Britain about whether or not government control is helpful to some industries.

I just want to state that Russia was not "previously known as the Soviet Union". It was a part of the Soviet Union, along with 14 OTHER COUNTRIES. Seems like a significant difference to me.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

I just want to state that Russia was not "previously known as the Soviet Union". It was a part of the Soviet Union, along with 14 OTHER COUNTRIES. Seems like a significant difference to me.

gRomoZeka, Thank you VERY much for that clarification.

BTW, I thought the first thing would be about the phrase...

...other services they were used to having under Communism.

Especially since on another thread you had written...

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

What are you talking about?
Even Soviet leaders never dared to say that they managed to achieve the stage of Communism. USSR was a Union of Soviet Socialistic Republics.:

Originally Posted by rockzmom

BTW, I thought the first thing would be about the phrase...

...other services they were used to having under Communism.

Oh, I just missed this.
I'm so used to this trend of calling everything having to do with USSR "Communistic" that I kinda block it out without noticing. It's my "doublethink" vs their "doublespeak".

Semantics aside, everything else seems pretty much true, though the choice of facts presented surprised me a little (namely "freedom of the press" part, I find it somewhat weird that of all things that happend which they could try to cram into the six lines paragraph, they chose this one to stress. Looks a little like deliberately creating a certain image, imho).

Originally Posted by rockzmom

BTW, I thought the first thing would be about the phrase...

...other services they were used to having under Communism.

Explaining to a westerner that there never was Communism as such, and nobody here ever clamed it to exist as an accomplished thing, is like banging your head against a brick wall. They just seem unable to grasp this idea.

I would also add that the author appears to be letting his politics show through. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that he is not in favor of government-run health care. Not only does he associate it with Communism, but does not omit to mention that people complain about it in England.

That stands out to me, at least.

Originally Posted by E-learner

Explaining to a westerner that there never was Communism as such, and nobody here ever clamed it to exist as an accomplished thing, is like banging your head against a brick wall. They just seem unable to grasp this idea.

You're talking about people who can't even grasp the relatively simple fact that Russia and Ukraine are not the same country. What do you expect?

Originally Posted by E-learner

Explaining to a westerner that there never was Communism as such, and nobody here ever clamed it to exist as an accomplished thing, is like banging your head against a brick wall. They just seem unable to grasp this idea.

E-learner,

But aren't you all just pleased as punch that I have learned this? Me, the one who only knew that you find the biggest thing on the map, write USSR on it, and you get at least that part of the map test correct!

Now I need to go forth and spread the news... of course, USSR is not any longer and your flag has changed when I was not looking!

Russia was previously known as the Soviet Union

The United Kingdom, better known as Britain

[sarcasm] To be fair, they should have said "The United Kingdom, better known as England..." [/sarcasm]

Originally Posted by Matroskin Kot

You're talking about people who can't even grasp the relatively simple fact that Russia and Ukraine are not the same country. What do you expect?

No Matroskin Kot, you have it all wrong.... you are talking about people who when they heard about the Russian invasion/conflict of Georgia, they thought Georgia... as in Atlanta. Not Georgia... as in the Country.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

and your flag has changed when I was not looking!

Just for the record: my flag now is the Ukranian one.

and recently the new president of Russia has been enforcing laws that limit freedom of the press

I didn't get this one. Which laws are meant here?

Originally Posted by Оля

and recently the new president of Russia has been enforcing laws that limit freedom of the press

I didn't get this one. Which laws are meant here?

Автор тоже не знает, уверяю тебя.

Originally Posted by Matroskin Kot

Автор тоже не знает, уверяю тебя.

But the author should imply at least something!!

[quote=Оля]

Originally Posted by "Matroskin Kot":3d22ul2h

Автор тоже не знает, уверяю тебя.

But the author should imply at least something!! [/quote:3d22ul2h]

That's my point, he implies that there are laws against freedom of the press, knowing that nobody (certainly not 12 year-olds) is going to check. Besides, I'm sure he thinks it is true, after all, "it's Russia". Everybody knows they hate Freedom. :fool"

I would be interested to know what you russian fellows think of the utchebnik described in this article : http://www.polit.ru/analytics/2008/10/15/history.html
This is somehow reciprocal to the topic of this thread.

IMHO the texts are too short and primitive to be adequate to some intricate and ambiguous terms they use (like communism, democracy, market economy etc.). And I don't think they can be either interesting or useful for children.

Originally Posted by Zubr

I would be interested to know what you russian fellows think of the utchebnik described in this article : http://www.polit.ru/analytics/2008/10/15/history.html
This is somehow reciprocal to the topic of this thread.

To make a responsible opinion about a schoolbook one should read the very schoolbook (or at least some large citations), not someone else's opinion. Second hand opinion is cheap.

and the stuff about the UK is pretty laughable.

privatisation had nothing to do with people 'complaining' about nationalised industries. It was a policy of the Thatcher government driven by ideology, not democracy.... many people were against it but, because of the way the British electoral system works, one party can gain more or less unlimited power with less than 40% of the vote. Privatisation was deeply unpopular at the time.

Some of the privatisations were beneficial, many were not, but the driving force was certainly not public opinion

the texts are too short really, but considering they're meant for kids, that's not sot surprising. the info on the UK is ok in my opinion, just short. it is strange that the author included the part about the free press in the bit about Russia.
on a side note, i think our NHS is a good thing, although people bitch endlessly about it, plus we have excellent private hospitals so it's not like they have no choice

Those summaries are comical. There's nothing in them that is necessarily untrue per se, but they reek of ideological bias. Are sixth-grade textbooks in the US routinely provided by the Heritage Foundation?

Still, I suppose it's never too early to start a citizen's economic indoctrination. It makes the job Fox News has to do later on so much easier.