Mubarak and Egypt

Here is a brief and interesting comment comparing events in Egypt this week with the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981 that led to Hosni Mubarak becoming President of Egypt. Mubarak has always been a staunch ally of the United States, giving President Obama very little room to manoeuvre when reacting to the very considerable demands for greater political freedom. We will see how things develop.

The King's Speech

Nonsuch HP has been pleased to hear that many students have seen The King's Speech over the last few weeks. The film has clearly done very well, winning positive reviews, awards and nominations and seems to be very popular in the cinema. The film covers the events leading to the abdication of Edward VIII and George VI's accession to the throne. As this article shows, this was a time of economic and political crisis - the time of the Jarrow March and Oswald Mosley's blackshirts, and of ominous storm clouds gathering as Hitler increased his grip on Germany and its neighbours. The King's personal crisis therefore had important implications for a country in need of a figurehead. "When war broke out in 1939," writes Dominic Sandbrook, "he became an unlikely symbol of national resistance, his mundane domesticity a reminder of what Britain was fighting for."

There have been some criticisms of the film's historical accuracy - particularly over the role of Churchill. Michael White writes that, "The absence of deference, stifling and awful though it must have been, is inherently wrong." Christopher Hitchins is more critical of the portrayal of Churchill. He believes that the film shows Churchill to be too critical of Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, who were dangerously sympathetic to Hitler's views. In reality Churchill damaged his political repuation in his efforts to defend him, "turning up at the House of Commons—almost certainly heavily intoxicated... —and making an incoherent speech in defense of "loyalty" to a man who did not understand the concept."

What did you think of the film? Did you think it was acccurate, and does this matter? Please let us know.

Challenger

Today is the 25th anniversary of the explosion of the Challenger Space Shuttle. All 7 members of its crew were killed and the disaster was a major setback for the USA's space programme. The disaster was particularly memorable as millions of people around the world watched it happen live on television. This was partly because one of the astronauts was a teacher, Christa McAuliffe, who had been selected and trained to inspire students to take an interest in NASA's work. Many schools took an interest in the launch, which was beamed live to many classrooms. Nonsuch HP remembers very clearly watching the footage on Newsround the next day. This BBC article examines how Americans reacted to the tragedy.











President Obama's recent reference to a "Sputnik Moment" in his State of the Union address shows America's continuing fascination with space exploration. It will be interesting to see if competition from China (who last month, just as America's Secretary of Defence was visiting, unveiled their latest "stealth" jet fighter) will encourage a new "space race" to develop.

PS: You can read more about Sputnik (and hear it!) here and here on Nasa's history pages.

Holocaust Memorial Day

Today is Holocaust Memorial Day. We were reminded of this at Nonsuch by Mr Sides' excellent assembly that focused on some of the lesser known stories of the Holocaust, such as the treatment of Jews in Nazi-occupied Greece, and the work of Nicholas Winton, a British businessman who was able to transport 669 Jewish children out of Prague before the Second World War began. You can learn more about him here and here. He is still alive (aged 101!) and recently met 22 of the people who he saved. Channel 5 has made a documentary about him and you can watch it here.

The History Today blog discusses the opening of a new website, The Holocaust Explained, designed to explain why the Holocaust and other acts of genocide took place. There are useful timelines and answers to key questions. There is an also an article discussing the origins of the term "blood libel", used recently and controversially by Sarah Palin. It refers to a particularly unpleasant myth used to spread hysteria about Jewish communities, and is something that really should not be used outside of its historical context.

It may now be 66 years since Auschwitz was liberated, but Holocaust Memorial Day provides an important moment to stop and think about how we always have a choice either to either condone something we know to be wrong through inaction or stand up against it. It is up to us.

How Hitler was Fooled

A document has come to light at Bletchley Park showing how Hitler had been convinced that the Allies would invade in the Calais region in 1944. He then ordered his troops to concentrate their defences there, allowing the D-Day landings to go ahead on 6 June with less resistance than they would otherwise have met. The story of how he was fooled is fascinating, and involves a Spanish double agent called Juan Pujol Garcia, known by his codename of Garbo. This "balding, boring, unsmiling little man" convinced the Germans that he was passing on genuine British intelligence. Indeed, much of the time he was in order to strengthen his cover, but when it came to crucial information such as this he was able to completely deceive them. He eventually gave advance warning of the actual landing sites, but too late for the Germans to deal with it, and then followed it up with red herrings designed to convince them that further, heavier attacks would take place elsewhere in France later on.

German intelligence, sent in the Enigma code, was then deciphered by the team of up to 10,000 people working at Bletchley Park, and this particular document gave absolute proof that Hitler had been fooled. "It was like turning up a crock of gold," said Peter Wescombe, who used to work there. "It was absolutely wonderful."

You can find out more about Bletchley Park at their website, and on this BBC page which includes videos of how the Enigma machines work and how they were decoded by Alan Turing and his team of "unarmed intellectuals".

PS: Here are some of the other interesting documents that have been recently revealed.

State of the Union

It was Obama's State of the Union address yesterday. With Gabrielle Giffords' seat empty, there was a real mood of bipartisanship if only among some of the Congressmen and women who, contrary to convention, chose to sit together. Many commentators have seen it as a speech that defiantly argues for the positive role of government - see below's quotation, Mark Mardell and Channel 4 - but there is much else to consider - see BBC's key excerpts.
"I recognize that some in this chamber have already proposed deeper cuts, and I'm willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. But let's make sure that we're not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. And let's make sure what we're cutting is really excess weight. Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. It may feel like you're flying high at first, but it won't take long before you'll feel the impact."
And for those thinking of becoming a teacher, "To every young person listening tonight who's contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child - become a teacher. Your country needs you."

The Collapse of the Soviet Union

Dr Emmett Sullivan from Royal Holloway returns to Nonsuch on Tuesday to talk about the reasons why the Soviet Union eventually collapsed in 1991 (The picture above is from the failed coup in 1991). It will be at 1.15 in the library and everyone is welcome. It will of course be of particular interest to A2 students for their extended essay and GCSE students for their Cold War studies.

The Mumsnet Mafia

Two interesting articles with a similar parenting themes have appeared over the weekend. Bagehot in the Economist examines the phenomenon that all three of the party leaders, plus many of their significant advisers, all have children aged 9 or under. This is partly because they are all younger than their predecessors, generally in their early 40s, and have chosen to have their children later. All have committed to spend quality time with their families, and Bagehot asks how else they might be affected.
"The Tory party of ten years ago was slow to grasp the importance of social policies," he writes. "For today’s leadership, children are the “ultimate nudge”, he says, a reference to the Cameron camp’s zeal for “nudging” people into changing behaviour. At its simplest, parenthood exposes even the affluent middle classes to public services, from hospitals to day-care centres or libraries."

Meanwhile The Guardian has an interview with Justine Roberts, the founder of the Mumsnet parenting website. This site has attracted a huge amount of political attention and media interest, as its forthright contributors are seen as having considerable influence on political opinion, particularly with the current obsesssion with the "Squeezed middle" group. Gordon Brown's refusal to reveal his favourite biscuit in an online interview caused a brief controversy in 2009, but more recent issues, such as criticism of the recent EastEnders baby-swap plot, and the Riven Vincent case, show that the site's influence is continuing to grow. What's your opinion?

10 O'Clock Live

Channel 4 launched 10 O'Clock Live last night with excellent timing, broadcasting as it did just hours after Alan Johnson's resignation. It is being pitched as their answer to the USA's Daily Show, although it is a pity that that series has now been curtailed on More 4 to one episode a week. The Guardian's review noted that it received an immediate avalanche of criticism on Twitter, but that the show had some long term promise! Did you watch it? What did you think? Please let us know.

Disastrous History Teaching

Nonsuch HP has just discovered this extract (5 minutes long - well worth listening to) from an discussion that took place over Christmas on the Today Programme. On it the historians Niall Ferguson and Tariq Ali (shown above) are both in agreement that the current teaching of History in schools is "disastrous" and a "disgrace". Ferguson argues that History is taught in a very fragmented way, wih no narrative structure, and students are giving it up too soon. Ali says that students come away from school with "virtually worthless" knowledge and standards are considerably lower than anywhere else in Europe, India or China, a problem that is continuing into university as well.

This connects in with the coalition's ongoing interest in reforming the curriculum, as discussed before in the blog. Do you agree with these views? Has your education been disastrous? What should be changed?