Its interesting because one of the calls of perceived 'white privilege' is 'I have the privilege to learn about my race in school'. 'White privilege is white history being taught as part of the curriculum and others as an elective'.
Sadly thats what she basicaly said and thats why there is black history month.
Which is pretty dumb...
We don't learn about "white history" in school, there is certainly a focus on British History for obvious reasons, which happens to involve plenty of white people but hardly exclusively.
Some stuff I remember covering up to and including GCSE History:
Ancient Egypt early on in school. are Egyptians white?
Again early on - ancient Greece, Trojan war.
There was some coverage of the Vietnam war, are Vietnamese people white?
GCSE stuff:
WW2 - the Gallipoli campaign, are the Turks/Ottomans white?
The Japanese & China pre WW2 - are the Japanese and Chinese white?
The Abyssinia Crisis, again pre-WW2, a Corridor for Camels... are Ethiopeans white?
Sure there was also coverage of the Tudors and the Stuarts, the Norman Invasion of England, the industrial revolution etc...
Outside of history class... RE lessons were focused mostly on the middle east and early Christianity and then later coverage of other world religions... hardly white focused at all, quite the opposite really.
English Literature... well I guess MacBeth and Romeo and Juliette are rather white, Animal Farm was... well Animals, Of Mice and Men was set in the US during the depression and to Kill a Mocking Bird was very much focused on race relations and inequality.
It seems like we've got such low levels of racism that people are now more concerned about quotas, microaggressions and wanting to be pandered to.
A white person of Polish origin can just as easily argue that they're barely represented too, aside from some of the WW2 coverage where they get invaded by Germany and Russia.
And won't anyone think of the Pacific Islanders - why aren't they given more coverage in British History classes?