John Yamamoto-Wilson wrote:

> > > Don't get me wrong, though. I teach British culture, and in my class we
> > > cover plenty of shameful aspects of the British Empire - the Slave
> Triangle,
> > > the Opium Wars, the exploitation of child labour in English factories,
> the
> > > treatment handed out to the Irish (including of course the Potato
> Famine).
> >
> > There's more, but damn right, they get what Japanese kids don't.
>
> Well, if "they" means my students,

I misunderstood this to mean British students of history.

> I should point out that they *are*
> Japanese and, yes, the course does cover WWII, and I generally round things
> off at the end by telling them that if they've followed carefully (and most
> of them do, bless 'em) they quite probably know more about the history and
> culture of Britain than they do about Japan, *and that's not right*!

Yes, people should know more about their own country.

> They
> should now about their own country in at least as much detail! Gets them
> thinking, anyway, and since a large part of my focus is on getting students
> to google and get books off library shelves and dig out facts for themselves
> it's really up to them from that point on.

Why would you not expect a teacher of Japanese history beginning in junior high
school to teach them about Japanese history including the bad parts? Why is it
your job to teach them about British history including the bad bits, while you
and at least one other poster think that Japanese kids need to find things out
on their own, instead of being taught more about their history?