'Inculcating shame about our past!' Schoolchildren taught black people built Stonehenge - Eighty three per cent of secondary schools change their history curricula to 'decolonise it'

Link: https://www.gbnews.com/news/woke-madness-schoolchildren-taught-black-people-built-stonehenge
Credit: Lewis Henderson, GB News
Archive: https://archive.ph/wip/Vn0TM

stonehenge.webp

Schoolchildren are being taught that black people built Stonehenge as part of a push to "decolonise" the curriculum, a bombshell report has revealed.

According to research by the think tank Policy Exchange, the book Brilliant Black British History makes this claim and is still used in schools.

Written by Nigerian-born British author, Atinuke, the book states that the first British people were black and "Britain was a black country for more than 7,000 years before white people came".

Stop Hate UK said the book "is a huge step forward in ensuring racist attitudes do not progress into children of the next generation".

The report from Policy Exchange suggested the book is pushing the "diversifying" narrative "too far", with history in schools.

It found that 83 per cent of secondary schools changed their history curriculum to "decolonise" it, which tends to involve reducing topics that are too white.

It stated: "In some cases, this had a positive effect, exposing students to varied and knowledge-rich studies that better cover key areas of British history, such as the women's suffrage movement, as well as a wider range of world history.

"However, in too many cases, this process has gone too far, leading to the teaching of radical and contested interpretations of the past as fact, or with anecdotes of interesting lives replacing a deeper understanding of the core drivers of history.

"Numerous cases of poor-quality resources being used to teach contested narratives as fact have been identified.

"For example, one book used in classrooms claims black people built Stonehenge, whilst free resources produced by a subject organisation celebrate the genital mutilation of a slave as a form of 'gender transition'."

The research discovered schools had dropped key parts of British history, including the Battle of Agincourt, where less than one in five teach the topic, and only 11 per cent include the Battles of Trafalgar and Waterloo.

The report recommended creating a new exam paper focused on British history, with historian Lord Roberts noting that "it is vital pupils are taught the history of their own nation".

school-children.webp

The book in school claims black people were the first people to arrive in Britain

Roberts added: "It is vital that pupils are taught the history of their own nation in a manner that seeks to do more than simply inculcate shame about our past."

Former Education Secretaries Lord Blunkett and Nadhim Zahawi also endorsed the report.

Ex-Conservative Schools Minister Sir Nick Gibb said: "Policy Exchange's report rightly identifies that the area where further improvement is needed is at GCSE-level.

"Where increasing specialisation and an over-emphasis on narrow 'theme-related' topics, such as health, means that too many pupils are never exposed to the full chronological breadth of British history.

"It cannot be right that a pupil could achieve a 'nine' in GCSE History and yet never have heard of the Glorious Revolution or the Act of Union."
 
Europeans were dark prior to the neolothic, around 10,000 years ago, and may have been darker-skinned than today after that point, but that's around the time white skin (alongside a host of other cold adaptatiopns, such as narrow noses and thicker body hair) is thought to have evolved on the continent. They keep trying to pull the date for white skin closer to the present with "new discoveries", because it's an easy way to develop a classic motte and bailey argument. When they say "early britons were black", what they mean is "early britons were indistinguishable from africans", but when challenged they will retreat to "we're just saying they darker skin bro, why are you so upset?" The idea is to claim that white Europeans usurped black african kangz.
I'm not sure we do know that time period for becoming lighter skinned actually. 10,000 years ago is later than the estimated date for Cheddar Man which @Otterly mentioned above. And there's no evidence for him being dark skinned despite the BBC throwing out images like this:
1747569424706.webp

Hell I don't even know how accurate the popular image of early hominids being dark skinned is. Chimpanzees are our nearest relatives and have you ever seen a shaved chimpanzee? They're not exactly dark skinned. Evolution isn't the line most people think it is.
1747569533941.webp
 
I am going to sound like a broken record at this point.

Indo Europeans are not the native peoples of Europe and they were the peoples who displaced whoever built Stonehenge (likely Old European farmers)

For all I know they could have been blacker than the blackest gorilla niggers.
 
It’s been sunny for weeks now here in dear ol’ Blighty. Most of the single mothers I see down Tesco are browner than that. Don’t mistake race where determination and SPF Zero can apply.
 
The Jews want the world to believe that whites are cursed by god to wander the planet with no homeland of their own…
I mean, officially none of the European populations count as natives anyway. As in, they don't have any of the UN protections that natives get, since "natives" have to be oppressed minorities per definitionem. So only peoples like the Sami count as natives, the majority populations of Europe do not get any protections to preserve their people or cultures.
 
I mean, officially none of the European populations count as natives anyway. As in, they don't have any of the UN protections that natives get, since "natives" have to be oppressed minorities per definitionem. So only peoples like the Sami count as natives, the majority populations of Europe do not get any protections to preserve their people or cultures.
The UN and EU are explicitly anti-white organizations. Look up the Charlemagne Prize and Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize. Awards are literally given to politicians in the EU that work towards the cultural and genetic destruction of European peoples within their homelands.
 
Indo Europeans are not the native peoples of Europe and they were the peoples who displaced whoever built Stonehenge (likely Old European farmers)
We know for a fact that neolithic populations had white skin. The kurgan hypothesis you are referencing - the belief that neolithic populations were entirely displaced by a later population influx - has very little actual evidence to back it up, with much of the evidence pointing to the influx of indo-european cultural artefacts being cultural exchange and population merging rather population displacement. Sample any modern european and you'll find direct continuity, often with the majority of his genome, to those ancient neolithic populations. Cheddar man, for example, has a direct descendants living within spitting difference of where his skeleton was found.
 
The kurgan hypothesis has very little actual evidence to back it up, with all the evidence pointing to the influx of indo-european cultural artefacts being cultural exchange rather population displacement. Sample any modern european and you'll find direct continuity, often with the majority of his genome, to those ancient neolithic populations. Cheddar man has a direct descendants living within spitting difference of where his skeleton was found.
Coping descendant of cucks who were taken over by swastika emblazoned chariots detected
 
Back