So we are being assigned a side for our Napoleon debate -_-

So apparently our history teacher thinks we don't have the ability to think for ourselves, and instead of letting us choose whether we should support the side whether we think he was a hero, or the side that believes he was a tyrant. Instead, she is gonna assign us sides and I am pissed off at this because I am almost sure that I will be assigned the side that believes he is a tyrant which there is almost no way I could try and give a convincing argument against the side I wholeheartedly believe in.

That's a pretty stupid idea. I guess she is afraid all the kids would choose one side or just the side their friends are on?

To be honest, that's kind of what happens. Either everyone is on one side, or everyone just gets with their friends, which can ruin a debate

Sucks when that happens, but I can see why the teacher did it because people do have a tendency to just group up with friends and that doesn't trun out good for debates.

Go to the Napoleon is a tyrant thread, read up on that. Pretty much go "HE DIDN'T SUPPORT DEMOCRACY OH NOOOOOO"

I doubt it would be that, more realistically she would think that the students are completely incapable of debating such things without it being a big fucking mess. Like the forums!

Most forum debates will go down to the following three

1. Communism vs Capitalism (same debate everytime, and same arguments)
2. Homosexuality
3. Intelligence and Faggotry.

That's basically the ancient Greek definition of the word 'tyrant'; dictator, with no negative connotations to it. So you can say he was a tyrant, and still support him. Of course there's a possibility no-one will understand this pedantry, and you'll get called anti-democratic or something.

Well every other time we had debates in our history classes, the students actually distributed pretty evenly. And on all the other issues, most people sided with what they actually believed and not just on what their friends chose.

If we had a history debate and we chose, everyone would join my side because I am "smart" to them and they think I have "never lost" a debate in my life even though I try to tell them I am not that "smart".

I wish our history classes would have debates like this.

What our classes mostly consists of is:

THE SWEDES ARE EVIL, THE PRUSSIANS R EVIL, THE BRITISH R ASSHOLE FOR DESTORYING OUR NAVY! etc. Really, I feel that nationalism has made it's way into our history classes, with everything being ludicrously one sided (trust me, we have heard NOTHING good of any countries or peoples, with an exception to Montgomery)

I really love history, but I want to learn about history not know about it.
I mean for crying out loud about 16/25 students in my class doesn't know who Julius Caesar or Augustus were!

Who are these people anyway.

Ordinary people. To be fair, 16/25 is quite an impressive amount.

As for Napoleon, you could argue that he was a huge hypocrite and completely wasted the lives of his own countrymen. We had an argument about this on the forum, but Nappy got all mad about us comparing Hitler to Napoleon and it soon ended.

25-16= 9

9 people is pretty impressive, better than my history classes.

Why does is seem like Schools with alot of funding have stupid teachers, but Urban overcrowded teachers have the best ones? Explain yourself immediately.

Obviously the well-educuated ones don't have the connections to get into more proper schools.

Well crisis averted, I have been assigned to argue that he was a hero. The sad thing is because my teacher is so obviously biased against Napoleon, she has already convinced people that he is Hitler's equivalent. -_-

I am so sorry.

It sucks being one of the only two people in your class who have any background knowledge on the topic.

Sounds like your teacher is awesome.