Take the 2-minute tour ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

What's the use of studying the country's history where we come from? My country used to be one and every one studied the same history. Then it broke apart. Now students from the new countries only study history that is relevant to their new country. Sometimes, they even study something contrary to what we study, because their historians analyze events in a different way. For example, was there independence or was there oppression, and who conquered who. It's quite meaningless, to be honest.

What's the use of making little children study historical events strictly the way their own country interprets them? It seems to me that when I was little, I wasn't really studying history, I was instead memorizing my own country's propaganda.

I find it kind of funny that we have to study the great poet of our country and memorize every event of his life, but if said poet had been born 20 km to the other side of the border, then he wouldn't even be included in the curriculum!?

Anyway, so if the purpose of studying history is to learn from our own mistakes, then why doesn't everyone study world history solely? This way, we could collectively learn from everyone else's mistake, and not just from the mistakes our own country has made.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Sardathrion, Orion, Lennart Regebro, MichaelF Dec 6 '11 at 21:41

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum. Quid enim est aetas hominis, nisi ea memoria rerum veterum cum superiorum aetate contexitur? This was written more than two thousands years ago and still hold true. On a side note, your question is really too general and does solicit argumentation so I voted to close. If you could refine it, I would happy vote to un-close. Finally, welcome to the site! ^_~ –  Sardathrion Dec 6 '11 at 16:35
    
Agreed, this is going to be argumentative. You are more than welcome to try and make this answerable in a historical context or try in meta. –  MichaelF Dec 6 '11 at 21:52
add comment