Embarrassingly Stupid Americans, the Video!

Embarrassingly Stupid Americans, the Video!

Jason Mattera
July 6, 2010

I could’ve also titled this piece “Cringe-Worthy” and “Mind-Numbingly Painful to Watch.” Um, the video you’re about to see is that awful for two reasons: 1) It’s a clear reminder that we’re losing our ethos and heritage as a country and 2) Wow, oh wow, our education system is quite the disaster. So here’s the deal: On the cusp of the Fourth of July, late-night comedian Jay Leno filmed one of his usual “Jaywalking” segments, this time testing the historical knowledge of Americans on… American history… in light of America celebrating her triumph over tyranny.

Alas, the stupidity is all there…

America gained independence from… Greece! Martha Washington sewed the first American Flag! Winston Churchill was the general who led the Revolutionary War! There were 30 original colonies! America came to being in the year… 1922! (That gem, mind you, came from a college professor. Seriously.)

This Leno clip may be funny, but as you’ll see following the video, the answers contained therein really do mirror the dumbing down of the American mind. See for yourself.


Now that the laughs are out of the way, how scary is it that these folks actually can go to the voting booth on Election Day? I mean, these people don’t even posses rudimentary knowledge of this country: the reasons why we broke ties from England and the moral basis our forebears articulated while organizing a limited form of government.

The Leno segment is not some anecdotal anomaly, but rather a national indictment. Writing on the pages of HUMAN EVENTS, Dr. Richard Brake pointed out that only 46 percent of college seniors were able to identify that the line “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” is in the Declaration of Independence. If that weren’t bad enough, only 49 percent of Americans overall can name the three branches of government. Forty-nine percent, people!

Similarly, according to research done by the American Civics Literacy Program, 75 percent of college grads have no clue what purpose the First Amendment serves, and barely 50 percent can describe what a free-market is. One main reason why we have an army of ignoramuses out there—or, Obama Zombies, as I like to call them—is because of our Leftist-dominated education establishment. Western Civilization and American civics are no longer education staples. Multiculturalism has replaced George Washington. Schools proudly offer classes like “Native American Feminism” (University of Michigan) and “Cyber Feminism” (Cornell University).

Or how about the University of Pennsylvania’s “Adultery Novel” class, which studies a series of 19th and 20th century works about adultery and watches “several adultery films” to place adultery “into its aesthetic, social and cultural context” Heck, UPENN even finds room for Marx in a course on marital infidelity, viewing trysts through “sociological descriptions of modernity, Marxist examinations of family” and “feminist work on the construction of gender.”

This is what the Left means when they talk about “diversity” and “multiculturalism”: heavy on nonsense and short of American education. But this kind of erasure of American identity and history goes a long way toward explaining the MTV-driven crap that preys on students’ abysmal understanding of the workings of the most powerful and affluent country on the planet.

As we’re celebrating our country’s beginning, let us remember the words of Thomas Paine, as we take it upon ourselves to educate the next generation: “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”

Un-fucking-believable, these people. How dumb can one get? I knew the answers to each and every one of those questions.

And certain people yap on and on about our poor educational system. It's becoming more and more clear that the system is getting worse than ever. It sure isn't due to a lack of money being spent on it. Quality.

Oscar Wilde once said "America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between." and I think Jay just proved him right. That was truly abysmal. I knew the answers to all but 2 of those questions, and I'm a Canuck.

alland wrote:Oscar Wilde once said "America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between." and I think Jay just proved him right. That was truly abysmal. I knew the answers to all but 2 of those questions, and I'm a Canuck.

Well there are people here in England who think that Helm's Deep was amongst the most noteworthy battles in our history.

Celebrating your independence from the British? Fat lot of good it did your education system, ungrateful bloody colonials :p

It took that 60 yr old man with his family to be able to answer all of those. Just shows ya the difference in generations and education quality from then to now.

I don't know that it indicates any change in quality, but a change in priorities. I said before that I think History lessons in this country are far too focussed on world history. I think that should be a separate subject entirely, or at least, History ought to be split into two halves - one of British history and the other of World History.

I mean, all of these events have shaped this country profoundly, having changed history forever: Magna Carta, The Black Death, War of the Roses, Henry VIII's Reformation, English Civil War, The Glorious Revolution, Acts of Union but I came away from school (even in the early 1990s) knowing nothing about some of those events, and only superficial knowledge of the rest. It was deemed more important to know every little detail of The Russian Revolution and Woodrow Wilson's 14 points.

When they're talking about introducing a 'British test' for new immigrants - and you have to stop and wonder what proportion of the people born here couldn't answer it - then you have a problem.

Basic British history lessons are a good idea I think. But there's the issue of HOW we learn now. Once learning was about learning a list of dates, being able to recite chunks of text books, speeches and the names of historical figures - and I'm not sure if THAT is really of any great value; it's the basics, but it's what you DO with that knowledge, how you build upon it that really matters. At junior school I remember covering history - we did Greece, Rome, South America (Aztecs) and the Victorians. Fun as that may have been, it might have been better to include a few history lessons on the broader aspects of British history. Start at a young age - and top it up throughout the education process, adding more in depth aspects as they progress.

Judging by the last family, it seems to be a generational issue - and I would say that is caused by a deterioration of the education system... Okay, what's that caused by? That's the real question that needs to be answered. IMO, at least some of it is caused by states that just refuse to teach students the correct things (Texas is the example, as they literally edit their textbooks to fit their (Texan) needs). Each state is is only answerable to itself as far as eduction is concerned - and if some don't want to teach their residents about certain things, those people will never learn it. It's why we need one national standard. We need it for sure through high school and probably for the state universities as well. As for the "lesser universities" (meaning community colleges, etc) maybe the standards can be different. But up to some point, everyone in the nation should be taught the same thing - and held to the same standards.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:I don't know that it indicates any change in quality, but a change in priorities. I said before that I think History lessons in this country are far too focussed on world history. I think that should be a separate subject entirely, or at least, History ought to be split into two halves - one of British history and the other of World History.

I mean, all of these events have shaped this country profoundly, having changed history forever: Magna Carta, The Black Death, War of the Roses, Henry VIII's Reformation, English Civil War, The Glorious Revolution, Acts of Union but I came away from school (even in the early 1990s) knowing nothing about some of those events, and only superficial knowledge of the rest. It was deemed more important to know every little detail of The Russian Revolution and Woodrow Wilson's 14 points.

Good point. It's becoming "global" and that's not right. Of course we need to learn about major events of history but when people here think Germany bombed Pearl Harbor, we got a problem. Too much emphasis on things that aren't necessary is what i think it is.... learning about things one doesn't need to know extensively.

BecMacFeegle wrote:When they're talking about introducing a 'British test' for new immigrants - and you have to stop and wonder what proportion of the people born here couldn't answer it - then you have a problem.

Basic British history lessons are a good idea I think. But there's the issue of HOW we learn now. Once learning was about learning a list of dates, being able to recite chunks of text books, speeches and the names of historical figures - and I'm not sure if THAT is really of any great value; it's the basics, but it's what you DO with that knowledge, how you build upon it that really matters. At junior school I remember covering history - we did Greece, Rome, South America (Aztecs) and the Victorians. Fun as that may have been, it might have been better to include a few history lessons on the broader aspects of British history. Start at a young age - and top it up throughout the education process, adding more in depth aspects as they progress.

I remember learning US history back in the 70's (yep, i'm an old fart) and learning quite a bit. Most of it bored me to death (because of my age at the time i guess), but to this day, i remember much of it clearly. Why kids today don't know things i know really bothers me.

BecMacFeegle wrote:When they're talking about introducing a 'British test' for new immigrants - and you have to stop and wonder what proportion of the people born here couldn't answer it - then you have a problem.

Even the basic stuff will be a problem for people who would cite Helm's Deep as our most noteworthy battle. Imagine the answers

Q: "Which Prime Minister declared war on Germany to start WWII?" A: "Benjamin Disraeli".
Q: "The Tudor Dynasty was founded as the unification of which two former warring Houses?" A: "House of Fraser and House Harkonnen"
Q: "What is a Gurkha?" A: "A baby Ghurkin"
Q: "Name one thing that Sir Walter Raleigh brought to the court of Elizabeth I" A: "Bicycles he found in South Armenia"

And so on to much horror...

BecMacFeegle wrote:Basic British history lessons are a good idea I think. But there's the issue of HOW we learn now. Once learning was about learning a list of dates, being able to recite chunks of text books, speeches and the names of historical figures - and I'm not sure if THAT is really of any great value; it's the basics, but it's what you DO with that knowledge, how you build upon it that really matters.

Yes, that points to some archaic notion that education is about how much you remember, and quantity of data over quality, rather than how you can evaluate it and place it in context; and in social sciences such as the subjects we took, that is not very wise, even more so for your subject because of the text-heavy nature of Classics.

BecMacFeegle wrote: At junior school I remember covering history - we did Greece, Rome, South America (Aztecs) and the Victorians. Fun as that may have been, it might have been better to include a few history lessons on the broader aspects of British history. Start at a young age - and top it up throughout the education process, adding more in depth aspects as they progress.

Even when I did medieval history at school it was so cursory. Very little of it had any substance aside, perhaps from The Black Death and Peasants Revolt and the fall of Richard II. We also did a bit on Henry VIII, but none of it ever seemed to be placed in context of why it was important to learn. And I loved my school history department, all of the teachers I had for the subject were great teachers of the subject but of course they were limited by the syllabus.

TexasBlue wrote:Good point. It's becoming "global" and that's not right. Of course we need to learn about major events of history but when people here think Germany bombed Pearl Harbor, we got a problem. Too much emphasis on things that aren't necessary is what i think it is.... learning about things one doesn't need to know extensively.

Perhaps it has become an embarrassment, and considered a little jingoistic too learn too much about one's history. I couldn't disagree more. The fact that history festivals and battle reenactments over here are so popular shows how much interest there is for our past.

Of course history can become very political, especially when being used to justify wars, invasions, colonialism and genocides but I think we have really moved beyond that linear "savagery-->barbarism-->civilisation" attitude of the Victorians. People who truly love history do so for the sake of itself, not because they want to feel superior to another country with a different history.

But back to the original video, I'm not sure you can blame Obama's government for this. His government has been in power for 18 months. Clearly some of these people left school a long time before that.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Q: "What is a Gurkha?" A: "A baby Ghurkin"

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:People who truly love history do so for the sake of itself, not because they want to feel superior to another country with a different history.

That's me. I find it fascinating the older i get.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:But back to the original video, I'm not sure you can blame Obama's government for this. His government has been in power for 18 months. Clearly some of these people left school a long time before that.

Never even implied that it was Obama's fault. I don't even think that. I blame it on years and years of political correctness in the classroom and too much union power to the teachers (have a hard time firing them) and the intervention of the federal gov't in education. The DEA has been around since 1973 and it's gone downhill since.

I apologise. I thought the comments after the video were your own, but I realise it was an opinion piece with the video embedded.

One main reason why we have an army of ignoramuses out there—or, Obama Zombies, as I like to call them—is because of our Leftist-dominated education establishment. Western Civilization and American civics are no longer education staples. Multiculturalism has replaced George Washington.

I too am often surprised at hearing the bizarre degrees being offered by US Colleges... especially an inappropriate designation of "feminist" to a quite a few. "Feminist literature" I can nearly understand... but why not do an English Literature degree and focus your projects and thesis/dissertation on feminist literature or works from a woman's perspective? Vague references to "Women's Studies" leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment and wondering what the hell it all means. What next "Feminist Astrophysics?"

Seems to me it is just a way of inventing non-subjects to push people into colleges when they aren't good enough to study a real subject. We have the same problem with degrees in such nonsense fair as "journalism" (good journalists should be studying English Language), "Travel and Tourism", "Leisure and Recreation", "General Studies" and the bane of The Daily Mail "Media Studies".

TexasBlue wrote:

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:People who truly love history do so for the sake of itself, not because they want to feel superior to another country with a different history.

That's me. I find it fascinating the older i get.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:But back to the original video, I'm not sure you can blame Obama's government for this. His government has been in power for 18 months. Clearly some of these people left school a long time before that.

Never even implied that it was Obama's fault. I don't even think that. I blame it on years and years of political correctness in the classroom and too much union power to the teachers (have a hard time firing them) and the intervention of the federal gov't in education. The DEA has been around since 1973 and it's gone downhill since.

I agree that political correctness has played a role in how people interact with each other - even in the classroom. But I don't think that's at fault for our dumbing down. That's the fault of the individual school districts who set their own agendas (for educating their students). Again, it comes down to regional standards. And that most certainly isn't Obama's fault. Or Bush's or Clinton's or Reagan's. It's the fault of the individual school districts around the country setting their own rules - and being answerable to no one but themselves. And that IMO is a result of regional ideology.

Any history teacher who can't make history interesting for kids needs a smack in the face. Kids LOVE history, but it has to be made interesting for them. Look at the popularity of things like the Horrible Histories books/TV series, how much kids LOVE family days at heritage sites when they get to interact with costumed guides, props - they need to be entertained and learning sneaks in through the back door.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:I apologise. I thought the comments after the video were your own, but I realise it was an opinion piece with the video embedded.

Very rarely do i comment in the article itself. I usually do that in a reply.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:I too am often surprised at hearing the bizarre degrees being offered by US Colleges... especially an inappropriate designation of "feminist" to a quite a few. "Feminist literature" I can nearly understand... but why not do an English Literature degree and focus your projects and thesis/dissertation on feminist literature or works from a woman's perspective? Vague references to "Women's Studies" leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment and wondering what the hell it all means. What next "Feminist Astrophysics?"

Seems to me it is just a way of inventing non-subjects to push people into colleges when they aren't good enough to study a real subject. We have the same problem with degrees in such nonsense fair as "journalism" (good journalists should be studying English Language), "Travel and Tourism", "Leisure and Recreation", "General Studies" and the bane of The Daily Mail "Media Studies".

It's what we here call political correctness. If 'enlightened' people don't get their way (examples you used in studies), they sue. So, colleges have to bend over backwards to accommodate everyone instead of the way it used to be. And folks wonder why things get expensive here. I guess when you have to litigate every other year for some moron who didn't like the name of a course, that happens.

BecMacFeegle wrote:Any history teacher who can't make history interesting for kids needs a smack in the face. Kids LOVE history, but it has to be made interesting for them. Look at the popularity of things like the Horrible Histories books/TV series, how much kids LOVE family days at heritage sites when they get to interact with costumed guides, props - they need to be entertained and learning sneaks in through the back door.

I hated English when i was in school. My English teacher in 12th grade was a riot. He was the funniest teacher i ever saw. He made it so that you looked forward to going to his class.

TexasBlue wrote:

The Leno segment is not some anecdotal anomaly, but rather a national indictment. Writing on the pages of HUMAN EVENTS, Dr. Richard Brake pointed out that only 46 percent of college seniors were able to identify that the line “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” is in the Declaration of Independence. If that weren’t bad enough, only 49 percent of Americans overall can name the three branches of government. Forty-nine percent, people!

And surely that is because the liberals have introduced classes that don't only focus on the US but also on the rest of the world. EVERY high school student is REQUIRED to take a "Citizenship" class where you learn all this stuff in detail. You're also required to take 4 years of English literature, 1 year of US History, and 1 year of World History even though that still mainly focuses on Britain and always finds its way back to the US via its ties to Britain. And that's only High School. You still have to take at least 3 Semesters of English Literature, a history class, political class, social studies class, etc. all the while you're paying a FORTUNE for all that. The first 2 years of College are pretty much just pre-requisites that EVERY student has to take in order to get "students on the same knowledge level", even though the literature and history classes don't teach you anything different than what the REQUIRED high school classes taught you. A little government regulation would go a long way here and would save students plenty of money as well.

TexasBlue wrote:

Similarly, according to research done by the American Civics Literacy Program, 75 percent of college grads have no clue what purpose the First Amendment serves, and barely 50 percent can describe what a free-market is. One main reason why we have an army of ignoramuses out there—or, Obama Zombies, as I like to call them—is because of our Leftist-dominated education establishment. Western Civilization and American civics are no longer education staples. Multiculturalism has replaced George Washington. Schools proudly offer classes like “Native American Feminism” (University of Michigan) and “Cyber Feminism” (Cornell University).

Yeah, those classes are for people who major in Women's Studies and nobody HAS to take them. At the same time, EVERY University REQUIRES you to take classes that teach you the answer to the above named questions. But while we're at it, let's also blame it on classes that you CAN take, but don't HAVE to, like Geography, Psychology, World Politics, etc. because surely those students know ALL about those classes and Multiculturalism while they know nothing of US Politics and history.

This author obviously isn't worried about making the article unbiased, but what can you expect from somebody who is endorsed by somebody like Ann Coulter?

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:
I too am often surprised at hearing the bizarre degrees being offered by US Colleges... especially an inappropriate designation of "feminist" to a quite a few. "Feminist literature" I can nearly understand... but why not do an English Literature degree and focus your projects and thesis/dissertation on feminist literature or works from a woman's perspective? Vague references to "Women's Studies" leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment and wondering what the hell it all means. What next "Feminist Astrophysics?"

The thing is that degrees like "Feminist Literature" are basically the same as any other Literature major, except for an extra couple of classes focusing on feminist literature. Basically, you take all the classes required to graduate with an English degree and then 3 semesters worth of Feminist Literature, and you'll have your degree.
The same thing is with different typed of engineering. Every engineer has to take the same kind of classes (Geology, Math, Physics, Chemistry, etc.) and the only thing that sets the different type of engineer degrees apart are about 3-4 semesters of specific classes. So if you want to be a Material Engineer major, you'll spend 90% of your classroom time among Electrical Engineers, Civil Engineers, etc.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:

Seems to me it is just a way of inventing non-subjects to push people into colleges when they aren't good enough to study a real subject. We have the same problem with degrees in such nonsense fair as "journalism" (good journalists should be studying English Language), "Travel and Tourism", "Leisure and Recreation", "General Studies" and the bane of The Daily Mail "Media Studies".

No, those are the kind of degrees that you could learn through an apprentice position. Things like "Welder", "Automotive Mechanic", "Dentist Assistant", "Accountant", etc. Those degrees typically take about 2 years to complete, where 80% of the classes are pre-requisites like History, Math, Social Studies, etc.