"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." --Abraham H. Maslow
In school, unless we had an alternative education, we were taught history through the eyes of the powerful and elite. We learned about Columbus' voyage to discover the new world and what he encountered there. We learned all about the founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence. We learned that Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.
It's also an over simplified description of a very narrow slice of a huge country's entire history. My examples are just to make a point. Viewing history from this perspective, is not really knowing history.
Educational institutions use frames whether they describe them as such or not. The frame public schools work within has mostly to do with what the powers that be will allow as history. Text books are consistently banned for information that may seem to 'radical' which, in essence, is what all of history is. Helen Keller, for example, wasn't just a deaf/blind/mute woman, but a great humanitarian who spoke on behalf of change in a period of nationalism and capitalist control. The fact that many of the early presidents were slave owners is consistently glossed over because 'that's how it was at the time'. History is revised in a very Orwellian way when school boards choose what to present and what not to.
I came across "The People's History of the United States". It's a book that has been around for almost thirty years and continues to be updated as history continues to be move forward.
"The People's History" is a prime example of a reframe. Some would consider the perspective to be more socialist or radical, and whether or not you believe it to be valid, it is an amazing way to look at history which has seldom been seen through the eyes of the disenfranchised.
Look at Columbus' "discovery" from the perspective of the people who were already there: genocide and blankets with small pox.
Or how about the pilgrims in their cute hats? They were supposed to be fleeing religious persecution as they explored the New World, but maybe the natives didn't see it this way. . .more of a violent colonization.
The most recent edition of "The People's History" has an amazing reframe of the war on terror. The media and the government espouses that the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms. Does that really make sense? Why would they care? Well, they don't. They really only care about us stationing U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, installing sanctions against Iraq "which... had resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children; [and] the continued U.S. support of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land."
Huh? That's not what the news tells us. Why hasn't this perspective been reported?
Frames are complicated, just as reality is complicated, just as life is complicated, but if we can see the frames for what they are, then we can control them.
In school, unless we had an alternative education, we were taught history through the eyes of the powerful and elite. We learned about Columbus' voyage to discover the new world and what he encountered there. We learned all about the founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence. We learned that Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.
It's also an over simplified description of a very narrow slice of a huge country's entire history. My examples are just to make a point. Viewing history from this perspective, is not really knowing history.
Educational institutions use frames whether they describe them as such or not. The frame public schools work within has mostly to do with what the powers that be will allow as history. Text books are consistently banned for information that may seem to 'radical' which, in essence, is what all of history is. Helen Keller, for example, wasn't just a deaf/blind/mute woman, but a great humanitarian who spoke on behalf of change in a period of nationalism and capitalist control. The fact that many of the early presidents were slave owners is consistently glossed over because 'that's how it was at the time'. History is revised in a very Orwellian way when school boards choose what to present and what not to.
I came across "The People's History of the United States". It's a book that has been around for almost thirty years and continues to be updated as history continues to be move forward.
"The People's History" is a prime example of a reframe. Some would consider the perspective to be more socialist or radical, and whether or not you believe it to be valid, it is an amazing way to look at history which has seldom been seen through the eyes of the disenfranchised.
Look at Columbus' "discovery" from the perspective of the people who were already there: genocide and blankets with small pox.
Or how about the pilgrims in their cute hats? They were supposed to be fleeing religious persecution as they explored the New World, but maybe the natives didn't see it this way. . .more of a violent colonization.
The most recent edition of "The People's History" has an amazing reframe of the war on terror. The media and the government espouses that the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms. Does that really make sense? Why would they care? Well, they don't. They really only care about us stationing U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, installing sanctions against Iraq "which... had resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children; [and] the continued U.S. support of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land."
Huh? That's not what the news tells us. Why hasn't this perspective been reported?
Frames are complicated, just as reality is complicated, just as life is complicated, but if we can see the frames for what they are, then we can control them.
About the Author:
Kenrick Cleveland teaches techniques to earn the business of affluent clients using persuasion. He runs public and private seminars and offers home study courses and coaching programs in persuasion techniques.
No comments:
Post a Comment