![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Charles Clarke is [possibly] an ignorant moron?
2007-Dec-03, Monday 00:34Words fail me. Clarke dismisses medieval historians (Friday May 9, 2003):
( Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it ) has never been more true today. But then, we are talking about Charles Clarke here.
ETA: Um, yeah. Shows me for posting late at night and not checking the date or checking the Cabinet membership, my brain forgot he's not in the cabinet any more. Ah well. Still should never have been said.
ETA2: Clarke defends himself and denies making the statement. Thanks to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
bagrec in the comments.
( I don't mind there being some medievalists around for ornamental purposes )Who the hell [was] he? you ask, and why should we care about his dismissive opinions when it comes to education policy? He [was]'s the Secretary of State for Education, the guy in charge of setting education policy. As my friend Alix puts it:
History is relative. No one period of history has innately more value than any other.( historical knowledge can be applied to any period, including today )Putting Ruth Kelly, an avowed extremist Catholic member of Opus Dei, in charge of equality was bad enough, but putting someone who doesn't believe in the value of education in charge of education? Words fail me.
( Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it ) has never been more true today. But then, we are talking about Charles Clarke here.
ETA: Um, yeah. Shows me for posting late at night and not checking the date or checking the Cabinet membership, my brain forgot he's not in the cabinet any more. Ah well. Still should never have been said.
ETA2: Clarke defends himself and denies making the statement. Thanks to
bagrec in the comments.
