edit: i like the prof a lot. he is making the lectures interesting. its actually his quality lecturing that provoked me to write all these complaints since this is the third time ive tried to take this particular history course (and actually have persevered past the drop date). it reminded me the shit parade that was the other two attempts.
why is it that the history honours people have mandatory methodology/philosophy of history courses while the regular history courses are basically a tardshow parade of peoples opinions of hitler/pol pot based on one or two articles? why doesnt ubc care that these poople are not going to find out for themselves that all historians have political agendas. indoctrinate these tards, inject them with some intellectual modesty, and do it now. as it stands, sans awareness of methodology, you have tards indoctrinated by the fifteen articles or so they read every course.
this course is a damn joke. a 15-minute presentation of one puny article with 5 page write-up, 7-9 page term paper (wtf) and conventional midterm/finals. its a 4th year course. the prof just brought up functionalism and everyone is flipping the fuck out.
poli sci is full of assholes but at least the theory profs in the department semi-try to force people to a) write frequently so you can actually get some feedback and b) consciously present the political baggage that these authors/conepts are carrying. there is a lot of room to suck at the great cock-altar of the canon and there is a lot of room to criticize it as well.
so far, it seems like history students think that the study of history is memorizing sequences of events whose veracity is assured by pictoral evidence on an overhead projector.
fuck history, fuck poli sci, why the fuck am i still at ubc.