• Smithsonian
    Institution
  • Travel
    With Us
  • Smithsonian
    Store
  • Smithsonian
    Channel
  • goSmithsonian
    Visitors Guide
  • Air & Space
    magazine

Smithsonian.com

  • Subscribe
  • History & Archaeology
  • Science
  • Ideas & Innovations
  • Arts & Culture
  • Travel & Food
  • At the Smithsonian
  • Photos
  • Videos
  • Games
  • Shop
  • Archaeology
  • U.S. History
  • World History
  • Today in History
  • Document Deep Dives
  • The Jetsons
  • National Treasures
  • Paleofuture
  • History & Archaeology

Lesson of a Lifetime

Her bold experiment to teach Iowa third graders about racial prejudice divided townspeople and thrust her onto the national stage. Decades later, Jane Elliott's students say the ordeal changed them for good

| | | Reddit | Digg | Stumble | Email |
  • By Stephen G. Bloom
  • Smithsonian magazine, September 2005, Subscribe
View More Photos »
Riceville Iowa was the unlikely setting for a controversial classroom exercise created by Jane Elliott. She insists it strengthened their character. Critics say it abused their trust.
Riceville, Iowa, was the unlikely setting for a controversial classroom exercise created by Jane Elliott. She insists it strengthened their character. Critics say it abused their trust. (Layne Kennedy)

Photo Gallery (1/3)

Riceville, Iowa, was the unlikely setting for a controversial classroom exercise created by Jane Elliott. She insists it strengthened their character. Critics say it abused their trust.

Explore more photos from the story


On the morning of april 5, 1968, a Friday, Steven Armstrong stepped into Jane Elliott's third-grade classroom in Riceville, Iowa. "Hey, Mrs. Elliott," Steven yelled as he slung his books on his desk.

"They shot that King yesterday. Why'd they shoot that King?" All 28 children found their desks, and Elliott said she had something special for them to do, to begin to understand the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. the day before. "How do you think it would feel to be a Negro boy or girl?" she asked the children, who were white. "It would be hard to know, wouldn't it, unless we actually experienced discrimination ourselves. Would you like to find out?"

A chorus of "Yeahs" went up, and so began one of the most astonishing exercises ever conducted in an American classroom. Now, almost four decades later, Elliott's experiment still matters—to the grown children with whom she experimented, to the people of Riceville, population 840, who all but ran her out of town, and to thousands of people around the world who have also participated in an exercise based on the experiment. (She prefers the term "exercise.") It is sometimes cited as a landmark of social science. The textbook publisher McGraw-Hill has listed her on a timeline of key educators, along with Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Horace Mann, Booker T. Washington, Maria Montessori and 23 others. Yet what Elliott did continues to stir controversy. One scholar asserts that it is "Orwellian" and teaches whites "self-contempt." A columnist at a Denver newspaper called it "evil."

That spring morning 37 years ago, the blue-eyed children were set apart from the children with brown or green eyes. Elliott pulled out green construction paper armbands and asked each of the blue-eyed kids to wear one. "The browneyed people are the better people in this room," Elliott began. "They are cleaner and they are smarter."

She knew that the children weren't going to buy her pitch unless she came up with a reason, and the more scientific to these Space Age children of the 1960s, the better. "Eye color, hair color and skin color are caused by a chemical," Elliott went on, writing MELANIN on the blackboard. Melanin, she said, is what causes intelligence. The more melanin, the darker the person's eyes—and the smarter the person. "Brown-eyed people have more of that chemical in their eyes, so brown-eyed people are better than those with blue eyes," Elliott said. "Blue-eyed people sit around and do nothing. You give them something nice and they just wreck it." She could feel a chasm forming between the two groups of students.

"Do blue-eyed people remember what they've been taught?" Elliott asked.

"No!" the brown-eyed kids said.

Elliott rattled off the rules for the day, saying blue-eyed kids had to use paper cups if they drank from the water fountain. "Why?" one girl asked.


On the morning of april 5, 1968, a Friday, Steven Armstrong stepped into Jane Elliott's third-grade classroom in Riceville, Iowa. "Hey, Mrs. Elliott," Steven yelled as he slung his books on his desk.

"They shot that King yesterday. Why'd they shoot that King?" All 28 children found their desks, and Elliott said she had something special for them to do, to begin to understand the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. the day before. "How do you think it would feel to be a Negro boy or girl?" she asked the children, who were white. "It would be hard to know, wouldn't it, unless we actually experienced discrimination ourselves. Would you like to find out?"

A chorus of "Yeahs" went up, and so began one of the most astonishing exercises ever conducted in an American classroom. Now, almost four decades later, Elliott's experiment still matters—to the grown children with whom she experimented, to the people of Riceville, population 840, who all but ran her out of town, and to thousands of people around the world who have also participated in an exercise based on the experiment. (She prefers the term "exercise.") It is sometimes cited as a landmark of social science. The textbook publisher McGraw-Hill has listed her on a timeline of key educators, along with Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Horace Mann, Booker T. Washington, Maria Montessori and 23 others. Yet what Elliott did continues to stir controversy. One scholar asserts that it is "Orwellian" and teaches whites "self-contempt." A columnist at a Denver newspaper called it "evil."

That spring morning 37 years ago, the blue-eyed children were set apart from the children with brown or green eyes. Elliott pulled out green construction paper armbands and asked each of the blue-eyed kids to wear one. "The browneyed people are the better people in this room," Elliott began. "They are cleaner and they are smarter."

She knew that the children weren't going to buy her pitch unless she came up with a reason, and the more scientific to these Space Age children of the 1960s, the better. "Eye color, hair color and skin color are caused by a chemical," Elliott went on, writing MELANIN on the blackboard. Melanin, she said, is what causes intelligence. The more melanin, the darker the person's eyes—and the smarter the person. "Brown-eyed people have more of that chemical in their eyes, so brown-eyed people are better than those with blue eyes," Elliott said. "Blue-eyed people sit around and do nothing. You give them something nice and they just wreck it." She could feel a chasm forming between the two groups of students.

"Do blue-eyed people remember what they've been taught?" Elliott asked.

"No!" the brown-eyed kids said.

Elliott rattled off the rules for the day, saying blue-eyed kids had to use paper cups if they drank from the water fountain. "Why?" one girl asked.

"Because we might catch something," a brown-eyed boy said. Everyone looked at Mrs. Elliott. She nodded. As the morning wore on, brown-eyed kids berated their blue-eyed classmates. "Well, what do you expect from him, Mrs. Elliott," a brown-eyed student said as a blue-eyed student got an arithmetic problem wrong. "He's a bluey!"

Then, the inevitable: "Hey, Mrs. Elliott, how come you're the teacher if you've got blue eyes?" a brown-eyed boy asked. Before she could answer, another boy piped up: "If she didn't have blue eyes, she'd be the principal or the superintendent."

At lunchtime, Elliott hurried to the teachers' lounge. She described to her colleagues what she'd done, remarking how several of her slower kids with brown eyes had transformed themselves into confident leaders of the class. Withdrawn brown-eyed kids were suddenly outgoing, some beaming with the widest smiles she had ever seen on them. She asked the other teachers what they were doing to bring news of the King assassination into their classrooms. The answer, in a word, was nothing.

Back in the classroom, Elliott's experiment had taken on a life of its own. A smart blue-eyed girl who had never had problems with multiplication tables started making mistakes. She slumped. At recess, three brown-eyed girls ganged up on her. "You better apologize to us for getting in our way because we're better than you are," one of the brownies said. The blue-eyed girl apologized.

On Monday, Elliott reversed the exercise, and the brown-eyed kids were told how shifty, dumb and lazy theywere. Later, it would occur to Elliott that the blueys were much less nasty than the brown-eyed kids had been, perhaps because the blue-eyed kids had felt the sting of being ostracized and didn't want to inflict it on their former tormentors.

When the exercise ended, some of the kids hugged, some cried. Elliott reminded them that the reason for the lesson was the King assassination, and she asked them to write down what they had learned. Typical of their responses was that of Debbie Hughes, who reported that "the people in Mrs. Elliott's room who had brown eyes got to discriminate against the people who had blue eyes. I have brown eyes. I felt like hitting them if I wanted to. I got to have five minutes extra of recess." The next day when the tables were turned, "I felt like quitting school. . . . I felt mad. That's what it feels like when you're discriminated against."

Elliott shared the essays with her mother, who showed them to the editor of the weekly Riceville Recorder. He printed them under the headline "How Discrimination Feels." The Associated Press followed up, quoting Elliott as saying she was "dumbfounded" by the exercise's effectiveness. "I think these children walked in a colored child's moccasins for a day," she was quoted as saying.

That might have been the end of it, but a month later, Elliott says, Johnny Carson called her. "Would you like to come on the show?" he asked.

Elliott flew to the NBC studio in New York City. On the "Tonight Show" Carson broke the ice by spoofing Elliott's rural roots. "I understand this is the first time you've flown?" Carson asked, grinning.

"On an airplane, it is," Elliott said to appreciative laughter from the studio audience. She chatted about the experiment, and before she knew it was whisked off the stage.

Hundreds of viewers wrote letters saying Elliott's work appalled them. "How dare you try this cruel experiment out on white children," one said. "Black children grow up accustomed to such behavior, but white children, there's no way they could possibly understand it. It's cruel to white children and will cause them great psychological damage."

Elliott replied, "Why are we so worried about the fragile egos of white children who experience a couple of hours of made-up racism one day when blacks experience real racism every day of their lives?"

The people of riceville did not exactly welcome Elliott home from New York with a hayride. Looking back, I think part of the problem was that, like the residents of other small midwestern towns I've covered, many in Riceville felt that calling attention to oneself was poor manners, and that Elliott had shone a bright light not just on herself but on Riceville; people all over the United States would think Riceville was full of bigots. Some residents were furious.

When Elliott walked into the teachers' lounge the next Monday, several teachers got up and walked out. When she went downtown to do errands, she heard whispers. She and her husband, Darald Elliott, then a grocer, have four children, and they, too, felt a backlash. Their 12-year-old daughter, Mary, came home from school one day in tears, sobbing that her sixth-grade classmates had surrounded her in the school hallway and taunted her by saying her mother would soon be sleeping with black men. Brian, the Elliotts' oldest son, got beaten up at school, and Jane called the ringleader's

mother. "Your son got what he deserved," the woman said. When Sarah, the Elliotts' oldest daughter, went to the girls' bathroom in junior high, she came out of a stall to see a message scrawled in red lipstick on the mirror: "Nigger lover."

Elliott is nothing if not stubborn. She would conduct the exercise for the nine more years she taught the third grade, and the next eight years she taught seventh and eighth graders before giving up teaching in Riceville, in 1985, largely to conduct the eye-color exercise for groups outside the school. In 1970, she demonstrated it for educators at a White House Conference on Children and Youth. ABC broadcast a documentary about her work. She has led training sessions at General Electric, Exxon, AT&T, IBM and other corporations, and has lectured to the IRS, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Department of Education and the Postal Service. She has spoken at more than 350 colleges and universities. She has appeared on the "Oprah Winfrey Show" five times.

The fourth of five children, Elliott was born on her family's farm in Riceville in 1933, and was delivered by her Irish-American father himself. She was 10 before the farmhouse had running water and electricity. She attended a oneroom rural schoolhouse.Today, at 72, Elliott, who has short white hair, a penetrating gaze and no-nonsense demeanor, shows no signs of slowing. She and Darald split their time between a converted schoolhouse in Osage, Iowa, a town 18 miles from Riceville, and a home near Riverside, California.

Elliott's friends and family say she's tenacious, and has always had a reformer's zeal. "She was an excellent school teacher, but she has a way about her," says 90-year-old Riceville native Patricia Bodenham, who has known Elliott since Jane was a baby. "She stirs people up."

Vision and tenacity may get results, but they don't always endear a person to her neighbors. "Mention two words—Jane Elliott—and you get a flood of emotions from people," says Jim Cross, the Riceville Recorder's editor these days. "You can see the look on their faces. It brings up immediate anger and hatred."

When I met Elliott in 2003, she hadn't been back to Riceville in 12 years. We walked into the principal's office at RicevilleElementary School, Elliott's old haunt. The secretary on duty looked up, startled, as if she had just seen a ghost. "We want to see Room No. 10," Elliott said. It was typical of Elliott's blunt style—no "Good morning," no small talk. The secretary said the south side of the building was closed, something about waxing the hallways. "We just want to peek in," I volunteered. "We'll just be a couple of minutes."

Absolutely not. "This here is Jane Elliott," I said.
"She taught in this school for 18 years."
"I know who she is."

We backed out. I was stunned. Elliott was not. "They can't forget me," she said, "and because of who they are, they can't forgive me."

We stopped on Woodlawn Avenue, and a woman in her mid-40s approached us on the sidewalk. "That you, Ms. Elliott?"

Jane shielded her eyes from the morning sun. "Malinda? Malinda Whisenhunt?"

"Ms. Elliott, how are you?"

The two hugged, and Whisenhunt had tears streaming down her cheeks. Now 45, she had been in Elliott's third grade class in 1969. "Let me look at you," Elliott said. "You know, sweetheart, you haven't changed one bit. You've still got that same sweet smile. And you'll always have it."

"I've never forgotten the exercise," Whisenhunt volunteered. "It changed my life. Not a day goes by without me thinking about it, Ms. Elliott. When my grandchildren are old enough, I'd give anything if you'd try the exercise out on them. Would you? Could you?"

Tears formed in the corners of Elliott's eyes.

The corn grows so fast in northern Iowa—from seedling to seven-foot-high stalk in 12 weeks—that it crackles. In the early morning, dew and fog cover the acres of gently swaying stalks that surround Riceville the way water surrounds an island. The tallest structure in Riceville is the water tower. The nearest traffic light is 20 miles away. The Hangout Bar & Grill, the Riceville Pharmacy and ATouch of Dutch, a restaurant owned by Mennonites, line Main Street. In a grassy front yard down the block is a hand-lettered sign: "Glads for Sale, 3 for $1." Folks leave their cars unlocked, keys in the ignition. Locals say that drivers don't signal when they turn because everyone knows where everyone else is going.

Most Riceville residents seem to have an opinion of Elliott, whether or not they've met her. "It's the same thing over and over again," Cross says. "It's Riceville 30 years ago. Some people feel we can't move on when you have her out there hawking her 30-year-old experiment. It's the Jane Elliott machine."

Walt Gabelmann, 83, was Riceville's mayor for 18 years beginning in 1966. "She could get kids to do anything she wanted them to," he says of Elliott. "She got carried away by this possession she developed over human beings."

A former teacher, Ruth Setka, 79, said she was perhaps the only teacher who would still talk to Elliott. "I think third grade was too young for what she did. Junior high, maybe. Little children don't like uproar in the classroom. And what she did caused an uproar. Everyone's tired of her. I'm tired of hearing about her and her experiment and how everyone here is a racist. That's not true. Let's just move on."

Steve Harnack, 62, served as the elementary school principal beginning in 1977. "I don't think this community was ready for what she did," he said. "Maybe the way to sell the exercise would have been to invite the parents in, to talk about what she'd be doing. You must get the parents first."

Dean Weaver, 70, superintendent of Riceville schools from 1972 to 1979, said, "She'd just go ahead and do things. She was a local girl and the other teachers were intimidated by her success. Jane would get invited to go to Timbuktu to give a speech. That got the other teachers angry."

For years scholars have evaluated Elliott's exercise, seeking to determine if it reduces racial prejudice in participants or poses a psychological risk to them. The results are mixed. Two education professors in England, Ivor F. Goodson and Pat Sikes, suggest that Elliott's experiment was unethical because the participants weren't informed of its real purpose beforehand. Alan Charles Kors, a professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania, says Elliott's diversity training is "Orwellian" and singled her out as "the Torquemada of thought reform." Kors writes that Elliott's exercise taught "blood-guilt and self-contempt to whites," adding that "in her view, nothing has changed in America since the collapse of Reconstruction." In a similar vein, Linda Seebach, a conservative columnist for the Rocky Mountain News, wrote in 2004 that Elliott was a "disgrace" and described her exercise as "sadistic," adding, "You would think that any normal person would realize that she had done an evil thing. But not Elliott. She repeated the abuse with subsequent classes, and finally turned it into a fully commercial enterprise."

Others have praised Elliott's exercise. In Building Moral Intelligence: The Seven Essential Virtues That Teach Kids to Do the Right Things, educational psychologist Michele Borda says it "teaches our children to counter stereotypes before they become full-fledged, lasting prejudices and to recognize that every human being has the right to be treated with respect." Amitai Etzioni, a sociologist at George WashingtonUniversity, says the exercise helps develop character and empathy. And StanfordUniversity psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo writes in his 1979 textbook, Psychology and Life, that Elliott's "remarkable" experiment tried to show "how easily prejudiced attitudes may be formed and how arbitrary and illogical they can be." Zimbardo—creator of the also controversial 1971 Stanford Prisoner Experiment, which was stopped after college student volunteers acting as "guards" humiliated students acting as "prisoners"—says Elliott's exercise is "more compelling than many done by professional psychologists."

Elliott defends her work as a mother defends her child. "You have to put the exercise in the context of the rest of the year. Yes, that day was tough. Yes, the children felt angry, hurt, betrayed. But they returned to a better place—unlike a child of color, who gets abused every day, and never has the ability to find him or herself in a nurturing classroom environment." As for the criticism that the exercise encourages children to distrust authority figures—the teacher lies, then recants the lies and maintains they were justified because of a greater good—she says she worked hard to rebuild her students' trust. The exercise is "an inoculation against racism," she says. "We give our children shots to inoculate them against polio and smallpox, to protect them against the realities in the future. There are risks to those inoculations, too, but we determine that those risks are worth taking."

Elliott says the role of a teacher is to enhance students' moral development. "That's what I tried to teach, and that's what drove the other teachers crazy. School ought to be about developing character, but most teachers won't touch that with a ten-foot pole."

Elliott and I were sitting at her dining room table. The smell of the crops and loam and topsoil and manure wafted though the open door. Outside, rows of corn stretched to the horizon. "There's a sense of renewal here that I've never seen anywhere else," Elliott says.

It occurs to me that for a teacher, the arrival of new students at the start of each school year has a lot in common with the return of crops each summer.

Elliott continues, "Just when you think that the fertile soil can sprout no more, another season comes round, and you see another year of bountiful crops, tall and straight. It makes you proud."


Single Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »

    Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.


Related topics: Education


| | | Reddit | Digg | Stumble | Email |
 

Add New Comment


Name: (required)

Email: (required)

Comment:

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until Smithsonian.com has approved them. Smithsonian reserves the right not to post any comments that are unlawful, threatening, offensive, defamatory, invasive of a person's privacy, inappropriate, confidential or proprietary, political messages, product endorsements, or other content that might otherwise violate any laws or policies.

Comments (9)

I had Mrs. Elliott as a teacher. My sister was in this exercise. First of all my sister was dark haired and had Blue eyes.
My parents still talk about this in a very GOOD way. I think she was a excellent teacher. We did not grow up in a town of prejudiced people. Was a quiet town and she gave us a hiccup which left a lot of the older people uncomfortable. Research this they have African American teachers doing this. So what she made money out of this...Bothers you cause you did not think of it first.

Good for you Mrs. Elliott...You had my sister Donna Jensen.

Posted by Patricia Jones on March 6,2012 | 09:49 PM

@ sarah elliott - love the irony of you supporting the elliott's exercise, and then in your next breath saying:

"White males have a very difficult time accepting this exercise...power and maintaining their hold on it eats up their souls.
May be the reason they die earlier than their female counterparts...?"

Are you seriously suggesting that only white men have a problem with this exercise and live shorter lives because of it? I doubt it. That kind of comment is precisely the attitude this exercise is supposed to attack.

In your attempt to show support for Elliott's anti-prejudice exercise you reveal your own prejudice. Perhaps you should read it again, because you have clearly failed to understand the principle behind it.

Also, thanks to all the others who put the xenophobic idiots in their place. I would applaud any teacher who did this exercise with my kids. Racism has no place in our modern day societies, and prejudice is an enemy we should all be aware of and fight at every opportunity.

Posted by unistudent79 on December 2,2011 | 11:09 AM

For those who think this a detriment to white children; listen to our brothers and sisters of color! Hear them when they tell you that if you think it unfair for white follks to experience this exercise for a few hours to a day-long workshop, then how do you rationalize how you have and do treat people of color, women, gays, etc. for a lifetime?
THANK YOU HELEN, black woman from Austrailia!
You said it...you said what mom says....you nailed it!
White males have a very difficult time accepting this exercise...power and maintaining their hold on it eats up their souls.
May be the reason they die earlier than their female counterparts...? idk. se

Posted by sarah elliott on November 5,2011 | 04:32 PM

I genuinely can't believe people have a problem with this genius. I had to check the dates of these comments to make sure they weren't posted in the 60s!

Ben Dover (nice name):

1. That wasn't her motivation and is irrelevant, like Kisara says you are probably reacting to the article only on an emotional level.
2. She does so to highlight that society does exactly the same thing to racial minorities.
3. This "cult of the expert" mentality is rather strange, what she has achieved should be based on its own merit. Even if she had qualifications I suspect you would have the same problems with her exercise. And I actually think it's quite impressive that she has gone down in history and is a part of many psychology degrees when she had no formal training.
4. Did you even read the article?
5. Again, no she doesn't, how much did you read of this?

Blue:

She was not a qualified psychologist but she was an experienced teacher and what she taught these kids was a valuable lesson for life about accepting others.

If she had asked for permission first then nothing would have come out of this and you know that as well as I do.

In my opinion this exercise should be mandatory. A class in empathy studies should be added to national curriculums and we should use this method to teach all children from an early age that discrimination is wrong.

Posted by Martin on May 20,2011 | 08:58 AM

This woman is brilliant, bluemlein I bet you're white? Having been treated in a manner of a black Australian through school and identifying as white out of the system it all rings so true, it's less than amusing that white people in a position of power won't sit through, for a few hours, what another race has to live with their entire lives.

Posted by Helen on May 14,2011 | 03:48 AM

if my child came home from school and told me about this psychological experiment i would blast the teacher right out of the water.

teachers are not trained psychologists unless they have a valid certificate that states that they are. they do NOT have the right to create silly little scenarios in their heads and impose them on very malleable young people. if elliott had asked anyone for permission first, she would have had to defend her reasoning and something more useful might have come out of it. but she did not.

just so you can place this comment in context - i am a very liberal white journalist and analyst. and i know the damage that can be done by mindless, off-hand comments, never mind deliberately structured "experiments" developed by trained psychologists and their cohort. and i do not, for one moment, believe that someone without an appreciation for the mystery of the developing mind should be permitted to whip up any sort of exercise on a whim.

Posted by bluemlein on April 25,2011 | 02:36 PM

@ Benjamin Dover:

I could not disagree with your sentiment more. Although it is yet to be determined whether or not the way Mrs. Jane Elliot performed this exercise with her students constitutes psychological damages, it is a fact that it is hard to conjure empathy for a person in a situation in which one has no experience. To the extent that Mrs. Elliot tries to teach others about discrimination and prejudice, her heart is in the right place. That she is able to make a living helping people understand the very real circumstances of discriminated minorities should not be held against her.

Your hyperbolic language suggests to me that you are reacting to what she is doing only on an emotional level. It seems to me that Mrs. Elliot is helping to make people aware of what they think and how they think when they see someone who is different from them. Some people will be upset and uncomfortable when they become aware of their prejudices and biases. But rather than get angry at Mrs. Elliot, perhaps they should analyze why they maintain these prejudices and whether or not they are truly justified. Far from "fomenting racial disharmony," she is bringing to light implicit discrimination and leaving people more sympathetic to the plights of others.

Posted by kisara_of_pern on February 28,2011 | 05:18 PM

With all due respect, these are the facts:

1. She's created a cottage industry for herself to the tune of $6,000/day in fees to appear, the sales of DVD's, CD's and other collateral material to profit from.
2. She penalizes people for things, actions and perceived attitudes they have not done or engaged it.
3. She has no training or academic background beyond that of your Bachelor's teaching certificate. Thus, her CV is rather barren of anything meaningful.
4. She demonizes people for the color of their skin and doesn't believe in rewarding performance, since it OBVIOUSLY MUST be related to skin color.
5. She foments racial disharmony.

Posted by Benjamin Dover on January 20,2011 | 11:50 AM

first time i ever heard of this lady and was curious, by the way say it one a dutch internetsite called holland.doc.nl, and was blown away --- having lived in the us -up untill my 12 - then gone back to europe and being felt outcast by the dutchfamily- not nowing why- this put alot in retrospective- and after that being conditioned by school- and not uderstanding why? this docu made alot understandable - and why we have so many problems here in europe and abroad(even why this computer is giving me strange signs about the way i write these english words - that should make sence to everyone!)abj - make a diff!

Posted by arthur on January 11,2011 | 05:42 PM



Advertisement


Most Popular

  • Viewed
  • Emailed
  • Commented
  1. Myths of the American Revolution
  2. For 40 Years, This Russian Family Was Cut Off From All Human Contact, Unaware of WWII
  3. Seven Famous People Who Missed the Titanic
  4. Women Spies of the Civil War
  5. A Brief History of the Salem Witch Trials
  6. The History of the Short-Lived Independent Republic of Florida
  7. We Had No Idea What Alexander Graham Bell Sounded Like. Until Now
  8. Tattoos
  9. The True Story of the Battle of Bunker Hill
  10. Gobekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple?
  1. For 40 Years, This Russian Family Was Cut Off From All Human Contact, Unaware of WWII
  1. Women Spies of the Civil War
  2. Seven Famous People Who Missed the Titanic
  3. The Space Race
  4. Looking at the Battle of Gettysburg Through Robert E. Lee’s Eyes
  5. The Freedom Riders, Then and Now
  6. The Great New England Vampire Panic
  7. The Women Who Fought in the Civil War
  8. New Light on Stonehenge
  9. Document Deep Dive: The Heartfelt Friendship Between Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey

View All Most Popular »

Advertisement

Follow Us

Smithsonian Magazine
@SmithsonianMag
Follow Smithsonian Magazine on Twitter

Sign up for regular email updates from Smithsonian.com, including daily newsletters and special offers.

In The Magazine

May 2013

  • Patriot Games
  • The Next Revolution
  • Blowing Up The Art World
  • The Body Eclectic
  • Microbe Hunters

View Table of Contents »






First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State   Zip
Email


Travel with Smithsonian




Smithsonian Store

Stars and Stripes Throw

Our exclusive Stars and Stripes Throw is a three-layer adaption of the 1861 “Stars and Stripes” quilt... $65



View full archiveRecent Issues


  • May 2013


  • Apr 2013


  • Mar 2013

Newsletter

Sign up for regular email updates from Smithsonian magazine, including free newsletters, special offers and current news updates.

Subscribe Now

About Us

Smithsonian.com expands on Smithsonian magazine's in-depth coverage of history, science, nature, the arts, travel, world culture and technology. Join us regularly as we take a dynamic and interactive approach to exploring modern and historic perspectives on the arts, sciences, nature, world culture and travel, including videos, blogs and a reader forum.

Explore our Brands

  • goSmithsonian.com
  • Smithsonian Air & Space Museum
  • Smithsonian Student Travel
  • Smithsonian Catalogue
  • Smithsonian Journeys
  • Smithsonian Channel
  • About Smithsonian
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising
  • Subscribe
  • RSS
  • Topics
  • Member Services
  • Copyright
  • Site Map
  • Privacy Policy
  • Ad Choices

Smithsonian Institution