Speaking of the Holocaust...

[Janie Grace]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/14/showbiz/bieber-anne-frank/index.html

 

I'm speechless. What an idiot.

[Mrs Mungo]

Wow. Humble much?

[Chris in VA]

I saw this on someone's FB post.

Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it smacks of self-importance.

 

But maybe he was saying something like, I hope she'd have liked my music and that it would've made her happy. That doesn't sound like a bad thing, even if it was all about him.

[aggieamy]

My first response is *eye roll* followed shortly by a *shakes head in disbelieber*.

[SKL]

Dumb, but I don't generally expect high sophistication from a teen guy.

[Dandelion]

Narcissistic little twit. <_< I just can't find a way to put a positive spin on this, even if he *meant well*.

[Mrs Mungo]

Really, it takes a special kind of ass to make the Holocaust all about you.

[Chris in VA]

I really do agree with you. He's probably so used to being self-referential.

[Cinder]

:001_huh: That's just . . . yeah, I have no words.

[*Lulu*]

So rarely is the word gobsmacked totally appropriate.

 

*shakes head in disbelief*

[Guest inoubliable]

He's a teenager.

He's a celebritwit.

He's been a celebritwit for more years than not, yes?

(I admit that I know next to nothing about this kid, except what I pick up just by being alive.)

 

I wouldn't expect that a child, who is doing his utmost to remain relevant to the people who pay his bills, would have a deep understanding of the Holocaust or what the people involved went through.

[SproutMamaK]

He's a teenager.

He's a celebritwit.

He's been a celebritwit for more years than not, yes?

(I admit that I know next to nothing about this kid, except what I pick up just by being alive.)

 

I wouldn't expect that a child, who is doing his utmost to remain relevant to the people who pay his bills, would have a deep understanding of the Holocaust or what the people involved went through.

 

 

He is 20 years old. I was married at 20. However much I agree that he's a twit, let's not pretend that 20 year olds are children who aren't capable of better than this. He lives in his own, has a job that support himself, is over 18 - this is an adult in every sense and there are no excuses for his behaviour.

[Remudamom]

He is 20 years old. I was married at 20. However much I agree that he's a twit, let's not pretend that 20 year olds are children who aren't capable of better than this. He lives in his own, has a job that support himself, is over 18 - this is an adult in every sense and there are no excuses for his behaviour.

 

 

 

Yeah. He's just an idiot.

[SKL]

Let me ask a question for the Canadians among us. Are Canadian children taught a lot about this in school or elsewhere? In the USA the "Holocaust" is a very raw subject, but not so much in most other countries. (There are more Jewish people in New York than in Israel or anywhere else in the world, so that could explain the difference.) If this is not a subject of much discussion / sensitivity in Canada, then perhaps we should not be expecting him to be as sensitive as a US young adult would be expected to be. I mean, his comment was still immature etc., but how insensitive depends on how aware he is of sensitivities to that particular event IMO.

[Janie Grace]

He is 20 years old. I was married at 20. However much I agree that he's a twit, let's not pretend that 20 year olds are children who aren't capable of better than this. He lives in his own, has a job that support himself, is over 18 - this is an adult in every sense and there are no excuses for his behaviour.

 

 

Exactly. And he just went through the ANNE FRANK MUSEUM for goodness' sake. I would hope that experience would give enough information about the Holocaust to jar a person's egocentricity for a few minutes, even if that person is a celebrity. Sheesh.

[Aslana]

I'm not sure what Canadian's teach as far as US History, but if he's visiting the Anne Frank Museum, he should have at least a general knowledge of exactly why that museum exists. He's a twit, yes. But he was also homeschooled and his mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system (that's our point in homeschooling, right?) and possibly taught him some US History.. Especially since we are Allies and the Holocaust didn't just affect us. It's world history and world history is important no matter where you are located.

 

That said, he's whiny, and over-rated music wise. :D Plus he auto-tunes way too much for my taste. :)

[SKL]

I'm not sure what Canadian's teach as far as US History, but if he's visiting the Anne Frank Museum, he should have at least a general knowledge of exactly why that museum exists. He's a twit, yes. But he was also homeschooled and his mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system (that's our point in homeschooling, right?) and possibly taught him some US History.. Especially since we are Allies and the Holocaust didn't just affect us. It's world history and world history is important no matter where you are located.

 

That said, he's whiny, and over-rated music wise. :D Plus he auto-tunes way too much for my taste. :)

 

You mean Dutch history, right?

[Guest inoubliable]

He is 20 years old. I was married at 20. However much I agree that he's a twit, let's not pretend that 20 year olds are children who aren't capable of better than this. He lives in his own, has a job that support himself, is over 18 - this is an adult in every sense and there are no excuses for his behaviour.

 

 

*shrug*

He's 19, according to Wikipedia, if we're going to get about his age.

 

Some people don't mature as quickly as others.

 

Some people aren't on the marriage and baby track in their late teens/early 20's, either - that's not really a measure for maturity and/or behavior. Some child actors are supporting themselves and their families well before they hit their teens. That doesn't make them adults, either.

 

I'm not giving him excuses. I don't know him. I'm simply pointing out reasons that could explain why he comes across as a shallow child.

[Aslana]

You mean Dutch history, right?

 

 

What do you mean? Beiber is Canadian and the Holocaust happened to many different races, mostly Jewish. And it was WORLD war II, not Dutch War II. And I learned about it in US (and World) History, not Dutch History. What are you getting at?

[SKL]

I also think some people are just too eager to find fault in the way this guy breathes. ... FTR, I have no feelings one way or the other for Bieber. I've never even heard his music. I hate the idea of these teen crazes. But it's just as silly to hold him to a "high standard" as to excuse everything he does. He's just a human and I know a lot of 19yos who say foolish things. I might even have been one once.

[SKL]

What do you mean? Beiber is Canadian and the Holocaust happened to many different races, mostly Jewish. And it was WORLD war II, not Dutch War II. And I learned about it in US (and World) History, not Dutch History. What are you getting at?

 

If I were a Canadian parent teaching about what happened in Europe during WWII, I probably would not refer to it as US history, but that's just me.

[Aslana]

Nah, I know what I said and what it is. I think you're just picking to pick. End of it. No, not end. Let me explain.

 

Beiber is Canadian.

I am American.

Beiber visited the Anne Frank Museum, which is located in the Netherlands.

 

But, since I learned about the Holocaust and Anne Frank in World and US history class, and since Beiber is Canadian and probably would not have had the exact same US History class I did, I simply stated that I wasn't sure what Canadians taught with regard to US History. Which is accurate. You point out this bit about Dutch history is drawing lines where none exist. You've done that in every thread we've had about slavery and the Holocaust.

 

I was taught it in US History. Not a Dutch history class. I am not Dutch and neither is Beiber. Where the museum is located is irrelevant (as is whether or not Frank was Dutch). What is relevant is what Beiber may have been taught in his history class about this issue.

 

That said, I agree with KKinVA. He's a silly 19 year old millionaire twit. He said something that in his mind probably meant what others think but came across the wrong way.

[SKL]

Nah, I know what I said and what it is. I think you're just picking to pick. End of it. No, not end. Let me explain.

 

Beiber is Canadian.

I am American.

Beiber visited the Anne Frank Museum, which is located in the Netherlands.

 

But, since I learned about the Holocaust and Anne Frank in World and US history class, and since Beiber is Canadian and probably would not have had the exact same US History class I did, I simply stated that I wasn't sure what Canadians taught with regard to US History. Which is accurate. You point out this bit about Dutch history is drawing lines where none exist. You've done that in every thread we've had about slavery and the Holocaust.

 

I was taught it in US History. Not a Dutch history class. I am not Dutch and neither is Beiber. Where the museum is located is irrelevant (as is whether or not Frank was Dutch). What is relevant is what Beiber may have been taught in his history class about this issue.

 

That said, I agree with KKinVA. He's a silly 19 year old millionaire twit. He said something that in his mind probably meant what others think but came across the wrong way.

 

I raised the point because this is the second time in recent days that someone referred to the "Holocaust" as if it were more of a US event than a European / world event. I find that very interesting and wonder why US folks seem to have internalized this event so much more than any other world event I can think of, and even more than many US atrocities. I doubt it is merely a typo, but of course I could be wrong.

[Aslana]

I raised the point because this is the second time in recent days that someone referred to the "Holocaust" as if it were more of a US event than a European / world event. I find that very interesting and wonder why US folks seem to have internalized this event so much more than any other world event I can think of, and even more than many US atrocities. I doubt it is merely a typo, but of course I could be wrong.

 

 

I certainly do not feel it is more a US event than a European one and I certainly did not say as much. What I said was I was taught this in US History AND World History class and that I was not aware of what Canadians would teach or how they would teach those two classes (because I do know some Canadians who teach US History, but not how they teach it).

 

None of what you imply was stated by me in any way.

 

As for why it is included in a US History class? Perhaps because the US was involved in the war and not just as a secondary involvement either that is gets included in both US and World History. Also too, European History is not taught as a stand alone course like US and World history and even then, at least in my area, Euro History is NOT offered until the college level.

[Dandelion]

I think the question of whether (or what) he was taught about the Holocaust is completely irrelevant.

 

Even if he had never heard of the Holocaust prior to arriving at the museum, he would have had a very good idea of what it was all about by the end of his tour. Even if he only paid minimal attention.

 

IMO this is a character and/or immaturity issue. Likely both.

[Mrs Mungo]

I raised the point because this is the second time in recent days that someone referred to the "Holocaust" as if it were more of a US event than a European / world event. I find that very interesting and wonder why US folks seem to have internalized this event so much more than any other world event I can think of, and even more than many US atrocities. I doubt it is merely a typo, but of course I could be wrong.

 

Nobody spoke of it as a US event. People spoke of it as an event that directly involved the US. Those are different views. Did the Holocaust involve the US? Yes, on many levels as has been explained to you.

 

That said, I've been through the Anne Frank Museum. It was incredibly touching and sad. I cried. The facts are presented right there in front of you, regardless of what you've been taught before. I cannot imagine only being so egocentric that I could only hope that she would have been in my group of fans. It's more than egocentric. It shows a very limited view of how he sees other people, especially young women. I would strongly advise young women to avoid dating someone with that view of women.

[Aslana]

I think the question of whether (or what) he was taught about the Holocaust is completely irrelevant.

 

Even if he had never heard of the Holocaust prior to arriving at the museum, he would have had a very good idea of what it was all about by the end of his tour. Even if he only paid minimal attention.

 

IMO this is a character and/or immaturity issue. Likely both.

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree and I was the one who brought up the education. I only have a very small Holocaust museum where I am located so I can imagine the power that went into this very big one. He is very immature as a person, so that's why I agree with you. I only brought up his education because that would/should have helped him to understand his comment was uncalled for and out of line.

 

Still do not know how to accurately multi-quote, but Mrs Mungo, I <3 you right now. Thanks...

[Janie Grace]

 

That said, I've been through the Anne Frank Museum. It was incredibly touching and sad. I cried. The facts are presented right there in front of you, regardless of what you've been taught before. I cannot imagine only being so egocentric that I could only hope that she would have been in my group of fans. It's more than egocentric. It shows a very limited view of how he sees other people, especially young women. I would strongly advise young women to avoid dating someone with that view of women.

 

Yes. THIS.

[SKL]

Nobody spoke of it as a US event. People spoke of it as an event that directly involved the US. Those are different views. Did the Holocaust involve the US? Yes, on many levels as has been explained to you.

 

Actually, the pp complained that Bieber's Canadian mom did not teach him some US history. PP said this twice in the same post. Now pp says that what was in pp's mind was something different, but in my mind, the words "US history" mean "history of the US," and if I'm Canadian I don't refer to WWII or European atrocities as US history, unless the US was the aggressor. How am I supposed to know that the pp was actually talking about "whatever was taught to me during the class here labeled US History"? Maybe I'm just dense. ... I never said US history should not cover this topic. That is a whole different issue. Like I said in that other thread, my kid is named after Anne Frank, so no, it's not that I don't care or think US kids shouldn't care about the WWII atrocities (any of them).

[SKL]

Unfortunately I have not been to the Netherlands yet, so I must defer to those who've been in the museum as far as whether that tour in itself should have been sufficient to inform a 19yo man how the world would read his guestbook comment.

[Mrs Mungo]

Unfortunately I have not been to the Netherlands yet, so I must defer to those who've been in the museum as far as whether that tour in itself should have been sufficient to inform a 19yo man how the world would read his guestbook comment.

 

This is a bizarre twist. Where did anyone say that the museum's tour should have informed him of how the world would react or interpret what he said? This is a person who regularly interacts with social media. I'm sure he knows that the world *can and will* react to the statements he puts out in the world. If he doesn't like the perception that people have of him, then it might be time for some self-reflection...or a handler.

[SKL]

Actually, the pp complained that Bieber's Canadian mom did not teach him some US history. PP said this twice in the same post. Now pp says that what was in pp's mind was something different, but in my mind, the words "US history" mean "history of the US," and if I'm Canadian I don't refer to WWII or European atrocities as US history, unless the US was the aggressor. How am I supposed to know that the pp was actually talking about "whatever was taught to me during the class here labeled US History"? Maybe I'm just dense. ... I never said US history should not cover this topic. That is a whole different issue. Like I said in that other thread, my kid is named after Anne Frank, so no, it's not that I don't care or think US kids shouldn't care about the WWII atrocities (any of them).

To be a little more direct, the pp's reference to the "Holocaust" as "US history" struck me as very US-centric. Surely Canada was doing something during those years as well. In the context of picking on a 19yo for not being very aware of much beyond himself, I thought it was ironic.

[SKL]

 

This is a bizarre twist. Where did anyone say that the museum's tour should have informed him of how the world would react or interpret what he said? This is a person who regularly interacts with social media. I'm sure he knows that the world *can and will* react to the statements he puts out in the world. If he doesn't like the perception that people have of him, then it might be time for some self-reflection...or a handler.

Let me be a little more clear. I don't follow Bieber nor care what he, or any other 19yo, says. The earth does not turn on what teenagers say, thank goodness. I got the impression, however, that those who have been in the museum feel that a one-hour tour should have affected Bieber's sensitivities so much that after that, no normal 19yo male would have made such a self-centered statement. This may be true. I'm saying I'll take your word for it.

[Aslana]

Actually, the pp complained that Bieber's Canadian mom did not teach him some US history. PP said this twice in the same post. Now pp says that what was in pp's mind was something different, but in my mind, the words "US history" mean "history of the US," and if I'm Canadian I don't refer to WWII or European atrocities as US history, unless the US was the aggressor. How am I supposed to know that the pp was actually talking about "whatever was taught to me during the class here labeled US History"? Maybe I'm just dense. ... I never said US history should not cover this topic. That is a whole different issue. Like I said in that other thread, my kid is named after Anne Frank, so no, it's not that I don't care or think US kids shouldn't care about the WWII atrocities (any of them).

 

 

 

Now I'm getting ticked off. I am that PP you refer to, if you are going to attack words I never said, at least have the guts to say my name. That said, I NEVER, EVER said that his mom did not teach him US history. I will quote exactly what I said so that you can STOP putting words into my mouth and saying things that were absolutely never said.

 

I said:

I'm not sure what Canadian's teach as far as US History, but if he's visiting the Anne Frank Museum, he should have at least a general knowledge of exactly why that museum exists. He's a twit, yes. But he was also homeschooled and his mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system (that's our point in homeschooling, right?) and possibly taught him some US History.. Especially since we are Allies and the Holocaust didn't just affect us. It's world history and world history is important no matter where you are located.

 

I am NOT SURE what Canadian's teach as far as US History.

 

...His mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system and possible taught him some US History.

 

 

NOWHERE do either of those statements say she "did not" teach it to him, nor did I "complain". My words were clear. I said I was not sure what was taught and I implied that I was taught it during US History class, so it was possibly that it could be taught during a US History class somewhere else because I stated I was not sure how that someplace else actually taught it.

 

You are being pedantic and drawing lines where none exist. US History does NOT mean just "history of the US", it means the history of the US PLUS everything the US participated in--which is not necessarily strictly things only located in the US.

 

And I've already covered your interpretation of US History and Holocaust being US-centric. You chose to ignore the fact that I stated that is NOT what is meant by that.

[SKL]

Now I'm getting ticked off. I am that PP you refer to, if you are going to attack words I never said, at least have the guts to say my name. That said, I NEVER, EVER said that his mom did not teach him US history. I will quote exactly what I said so that you can STOP putting words into my mouth and saying things that were absolutely never said.

 

I said:

 

 

I am NOT SURE what Canadian's teach as far as US History.

 

...His mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system and possible taught him some US History.

 

 

NOWHERE do either of those statements say she "did not" teach it to him, nor did I "complain". My words were clear. I said I was not sure what was taught and I implied that I was taught it during US History class, so it was possibly that it could be taught during a US History class somewhere else because I stated I was not sure how that someplace else actually taught it.

 

You are being pedantic and drawing lines where none exist. US History does NOT mean just "history of the US", it means the history of the US PLUS everything the US participated in--which is not necessarily strictly things only located in the US.

 

And I've already covered your interpretation of US History and Holocaust being US-centric. You chose to ignore the fact that I stated that is NOT what is meant by that.

 

It sounded like a complaint/accusation to me, but whatever; I can't hear your tone. But still, you seem intent on looking at this European event from the US perspective, even though we're talking about Canadian education / sensitivities. If the US did not exist, would not WWII have been part of the history lessons taught in Canada? Do you think they teach European/world history from the perspective of what the US had to do with it? That can't be it, and yet your words sure seem to imply that. If I were a Canadian and in a touchy mode, I'd be a bit miffed.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Politically the Holocaust has taken on a greater importance in the US than many other nations due to the relationship we have with Israel and the influence of the Jewish electorate in some swing states and Congress.

[Aslana]

Your miffing is not at my expense. It's because you are choosing to draw lines where none exist. You've done this in several threads now and are being pedantic about things stated. And you've done this to more than one person.

 

You are also reading way more into it than is intended and that's contributing to your miffing. In addition to putting words into my and others mouths that were not spoken, my guess is you are looking for something to be miffed at and if that's the case, there is no reasoning with someone who has already decided she's going to be miffed at non-existent things.

[nmoira]

Best comment I've read so far (from Boing Boing):

 

The kind folk at the Anne Frank House spared Bieber's feelings: "Very gracious of them not to point out that Anne would totally have preferred Radiohead." :tongue_smilie:

[SKL]

Your miffing is not at my expense. It's because you are choosing to draw lines where none exist. You've done this in several threads now and are being pedantic about things stated. And you've done this to more than one person.

 

You are also reading way more into it than is intended and that's contributing to your miffing. In addition to putting words into my and others mouths that were not spoken, my guess is you are looking for something to be miffed at and if that's the case, there is no reasoning with someone who has already decided she's going to be miffed at non-existent things.

 

I'm not miffed, just find the perspective interesting. Seems to me this whole thread is about how we should be miffed about a Canadian guy's lack of sensitivity, though I decline to be miffed since he's not a role model IMO. But I agree it's time to let this side discussion go. (Unless it comes up again on another thread.)

[LibraryLover]

Well. I'm going to go with that he is 19. The fact he stayed for an hour gives me hope he was moved. It's not a large area, and many 19 yr old young men might not bother to visit even if they were able. Maybe, don't laugh, in his own youthful male way, did understand that Anne Frank was a young teen, like many he has seen, who had a whole life to live, but died horribly before she could live it. Anne did love Hollywood, films, and decorated her little room with pictures of movie stars she cut from magazines. Maybe that humanized her and touched him?

 

I don't know if JB is a typical egotist pop star. If he is a person with a heart, maybe his skewed ego due to lifestyle, and his 19 yr old male brain, with the still-growing frontal lobe, got in his way?

 

That's all I've got. ;)

[LibraryLover]

I saw this on someone's FB post.

Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it smacks of self-importance.

 

But maybe he was saying something like, I hope she'd have liked my music and that it would've made her happy. That doesn't sound like a bad thing, even if it was all about him.

 

 

That's very concise. I'm not could about being concise. But that's where my mind went. I don't know anything about him, only that he is young. There is being a hugely famous, insulated, egocentric young man, and then there is being a dirt bag.

[Anne in CA]

Sadly, anyone who has READ Anne's diary would know that mostly she just wanted to be an ordinary teenager. She deeply felt the loss of her youth to protect her life and lamented it often. She was a huge fan of different movie stars. She had notebooks that she pasted her favorite pictures into. It breaks my heart to think of ALL the children in the world who do not get a "youth", of which Anne was a drop in the bucket.

 

I do not know if Mr. Beiber read her diaries and knew that she would probably have loved to be his fan, or if he is just arrogant. But he is a young person and the young are self centered.

[Aslana]

Sadly, anyone who has READ Anne's diary would know that mostly she just wanted to be an ordinary teenager. She deeply felt the loss of her youth to protect her life and lamented it often. She was a huge fan of different movie stars. She had notebooks that she pasted her favorite pictures into. It breaks my heart to think of ALL the children in the world who do not get a "youth", of which Anne was a drop in the bucket.

 

I do not know if Mr. Beiber read her diaries and knew that she would probably have loved to be his fan, or if he is just arrogant. But he is a young person and the young are self centered.

 

 

This is very true and something I forgot. I've read her diary many, many times over the years and you are correct--she DID spend a lot of time lamenting famous people and how she'd never get to enjoy the "company" of those people like others. Perhaps as self-centered as most youth are at that age, that's all Beiber meant by his statement, despite it being way out in left field and not appropriate for the occasion.

[kewb]

Politically the Holocaust has taken on a greater importance in the US than many other nations due to the relationship we have with Israel and the influence of the Jewish electorate in some swing states and Congress.

 

Please explain what you mean by the bolded. It looks like you are saying that there is pandering to a tiny section of the US population to affect outcomes of votes.

[WishboneDawn]

Now I'm getting ticked off. I am that PP you refer to, if you are going to attack words I never said, at least have the guts to say my name. That said, I NEVER, EVER said that his mom did not teach him US history. I will quote exactly what I said so that you can STOP putting words into my mouth and saying things that were absolutely never said.

 

I said:

 

 

I am NOT SURE what Canadian's teach as far as US History.

 

...His mom could have given him a slightly better education than the school system and possible taught him some US History.

 

 

NOWHERE do either of those statements say she "did not" teach it to him, nor did I "complain". My words were clear. I said I was not sure what was taught and I implied that I was taught it during US History class, so it was possibly that it could be taught during a US History class somewhere else because I stated I was not sure how that someplace else actually taught it.

 

You are being pedantic and drawing lines where none exist. US History does NOT mean just "history of the US", it means the history of the US PLUS everything the US participated in--which is not necessarily strictly things only located in the US.

 

And I've already covered your interpretation of US History and Holocaust being US-centric. You chose to ignore the fact that I stated that is NOT what is meant by that.

As someone from outside the US, I would not attach that meaning to US history. US history would cover the US. Yes, there would be talk of US involvement in world events but those would still be world events, not US history in any way. I think if you said, "it means the history of the US PLUS our involvement in world events," then there would be no issue with what you're saying. It may seem like nitpicking and semantics but your post did across as seeming to say the Holocaust and WWII were US events.

 

Of course Canadian kids study the Holocaust and know about Anne Frank. Heck, since we're part of the British Commonwealth our history of involvement in WWII is several years longer then that of the US so WWII would have been studied from a Canadian perspective in Canadian history classes as well. We went to war when Britain went to war. Of course Canadian kids study it.

 

Bieber has no excuse on that front. ;)

[WishboneDawn]

It sounded like a complaint/accusation to me, but whatever; I can't hear your tone. But still, you seem intent on looking at this European event from the US perspective, even though we're talking about Canadian education / sensitivities. If the US did not exist, would not WWII have been part of the history lessons taught in Canada? Do you think they teach European/world history from the perspective of what the US had to do with it? That can't be it, and yet your words sure seem to imply that. If I were a Canadian and in a touchy mode, I'd be a bit miffed.

 

We're never touchy. Too polite for that.

 

Although the matter does beg the question, do Americans learn that Canada fought in WWII? :D

[PachiSusan]

Justin Who?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

 

Please explain what you mean by the bolded. It looks like you are saying that there is pandering to a tiny section of the US population to affect outcomes of votes.

 

 

Pandering? No.

But there is a significant voting block that has successfully brought their issues/concerns forward. The backdrop of The Holocaust and mistakes the US made during that time adds to success of those lobbying efforts, and I believe has kept the Holocaust more visible to US politicians.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

 

As someone from outside the US, I would not attach that meaning to US history. US history would cover the US. Yes, there would be talk of US involvement in world events but those would still be world events, not US history in any way. I think if you said, "it means the history of the US PLUS our involvement in world events," then there would be no issue with what you're saying. It may seem like nitpicking and semantics but your post did across as seeming to say the Holocaust and WWII were US events.

 

Of course Canadian kids study the Holocaust and know about Anne Frank. Heck, since we're part of the British Commonwealth our history of involvement in WWII is several years longer then that of the US so WWII would have been studied from a Canadian perspective in Canadian history classes as well. We went to war when Britain went to war. Of course Canadian kids study it.

 

Bieber has no excuse on that front. ;)

 

 

Two years longer, not several.

[WishboneDawn]

Two years longer, not several.

 

 

You're right. Thank you.

 

ETA: I didn't mean to imply anything about US involement. I meant to emphasize the fact that Canada was there.