Is My History Book Biased when it comes to Communism?
I live in New York. I go to Public High School. My history textbook reads, on the chapter entitled "Lennon To Stalin To Gorbachev," and i quote, from the "Conclusion" section,
"The Democratic Centralism that Lennon advocated was eliminated when Stalin took power of the Politburo....Stalin's rule proves that Lennon's Communist ambitions, that seemed to work well under Lennon, could easily be manipulated and controlled by someone who values power over egalitarianism. ... Conservatives [Communists in The USSR] lamented that collectivization and socialism would have worked more efficiently if Lennon's model would have been followed after his death. ..."
Book: World Civilizations, The Global Experience.
I showed it to a member of the "Young Republicans Club" in my school, and he said it was "obviously giving indirect messages to the reader that Communism could work if done in a certain way"
do you agree?
Was there bias?
Fact: I put in the "conservatives are communist" thing to point out the FACT that Conservatives during the time of 1930-Present where the Communists, and the Liberals were the free-market Constitutional democracy-advocates. Don't be confused: Conservatives in RUSSIA during that time ARE NOT what Conservatives are now, and i didn't intend to suggest that THAT was the source of the bias. That part, i think, everyone can agree, is pretty factual. Conservatives in THE USSR for most of it's history were the HARD Communists (Bolsheviks) and the Liberals were either soft Communists (Melsheviks) or, if they dare, somewhat slightly SLIGHTLY Capitalist (especially after Stalin's death, as seen in Gorbachev and Khrushchev and the sort).
lol the textbook didn't mispell Lennin, i did, sorry about that. My Firefox automatically corrects Lennin to become Lennon.
I didn't ask if you agree with it, i asked if you thought it was biased. you can agree with it, and still think it's biased
- Bill SLv 49 years agoBest Answer
Socialism works in Europe?
Yes, your textbook is biased. All public school textbooks are left-biased.
- TimothyLv 59 years ago
I wouldn't call it bias so much as that it failed to give the reasons that explained what it was saying.
Communism can work if done in a specific way. It has never been done that way however. It's one of those things that looks fantastic on paper but just doesn't work right in practice.
It even given that though it could have worked better but there in lies the key problem with governments that decide amongst themselves who is in charge next. If you get a bad leader you're stuck with that leader and their bad policies until they're dead (generally) or you revolt. And if you get a few bad ones in a row then it gets really really bad.
Every single government system that has been used or considered has some good points and some bad points. At present many (possibly most) people feel the good points in democracy out weigh it's bad points and set it above the other government types.
In general people want to emulate what is working best right now. Currently that's democracy, I guarantee you if that changes at some point and a different government type looks to be working better you'll see a shift over to it.
Note, to the people talking about what a conservative is. Definitions of whether a party is liberal or conservative vary by the type of government in place and how they compare relative to the other parties.
Even using our viewpoint on the terms if party A wants to be totalitarian control 100% of everything (an absolute monarchy for instance) and party B just wants to control 90% of it then party B is conservative relative to party A by our standards.
- Legio XVIILv 79 years ago
Stalin's brand of communism was wholly more authoritarian and centralized than Lenin's original plan for the USSR (hence why there is an entire subset of communism called "Stalinism"). The book is accurate in that regard. However, the book fails to mention the famine that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1921 as a direct result of Lenin's economic style nicknamed "war communism." Of course, the USSR was also plunged in civil war for much of Lenin's reign, so it's hard to know for sure if that was the only cause. Stalin definitely moved away from the original ideals of the October Revolution and crafted his own dictatorship. I'm not sure your book has a direct bias, since it makes its points through indirect speakers ("conservatives lamented"). Just make sure you know how to separate commentary from hard facts.
- Anonymous9 years ago
the only bias there is in the eye of the beholder. socialism can work. it's not going to produce as much wealth as capitalism, but would a capitalist really describe capitalism as a good idea because it "works", or because it "kicks ***". there are examples of socialism that work, in Europe at the present for instance. Conservatives like to make it seem like they are all sad faced poor people who stand in line for bread, but those stereotypes aren't from socialisms per say, they are from communist and fascist disasters that named themselves "socialist" because they don't seem as bad that way. So, again. Socialism can work, in the sense that it doesn't have to fail. But if by work, you mean, is going to beat a balanced capitalist democracy, not likely. The text doesn't say, "...that collectivization and socialism would have been THE MOST AWESOME THING EVER...if Lennon's model would have been followed after his death." It says that it would have been more efficient. That's not a ringing endorsement.
and if the "bias" was intended at the "conservative" mention, fair enough, i suppose. but only in the same way that our founding fathers were "liberals", and that namesake would suggest an equality or similarity to today's "liberals". Same name, obviously different meaning. Though, in both cases, correct in a sense.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- virgodLv 79 years ago
Desired, there is a fine line between "Lennon" and "Lenin"... That's why that imaginary young republican had no idea what you are talking about... Lennonism could work with enough dope to go around... Leninism = fascism=obamanism is in practice a hell on Earth. Ask me, I was there for over 18 years of my life. Makes me cringe to think that young citizens of the greatest country in the world (despite hussein obama, minding you), can be so naive ...
- oohhbotherLv 79 years ago
The book makes no conclusions of it's own - it merely states what followers of the two factions said and did.
Facts are not bias.
The term "Conservatives" is used to describe the original communists against the others who would change it - it does not refer to American Conservatives.
This is a reading comprehension problem.
- Dennis CLv 59 years ago
wow ... im impressed with your research...
keep looking... you will find out more...
both did not care if you lived or died... lennin and stalin... but as the commie party grew old it just became more currupt... the government in russia have that curruptness over time... and unfortunately you have to fire a democrat from chicago because they are currupt from the start...
opt out a democrat in 2012
- Anonymous9 years ago
I went to school in New Jersey
Of course your book is biased. IF your state is run by liberals, they get to select the textbook and curriculum. They want you to grow up in their image and vote for them when you get old enough.
Quite smart of you to notice thisSource(s): EDIT: Where does it have facts? It has a "what if" scenario of what "could" have happened, no one can know what would have happened, so it is speculation and therefore opinion>
- Anonymous9 years ago
No, they are teaching you well. We teach the same stuff here in Cali. They should talk about the evil corporations that enslave people, and how the workers must struggle to overcome them.
- Anonymous9 years ago
Yes there is a bias and that statement that "conservatives are communist" is bull ****.
Conservatives are about LESS government power and control. That's not what happens in communism.