Another School. Another Teacher. This time it's Nazi's. I hate nazi's.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

All you're doing is pandering to emotions. You don't want to make people uncomfortable. Well guess what? The holocaust should make people f'n [my edit] uncomfortable, and it's appropriate in doing so. To understand racism, you have to think like a racist. Just because you write a racist paper doesn't mean you're suddenly going to become xenophobic. You're absolutely insane (and just plain wrong) if you honestly believe that. But you're an intelligent person, I know if you think about it you'll agree.

I don't see how I am pandering to emotions. The fact that I have explicitly stated that I have no problem with teaching the nitty-gritty details of the WWII holocaust -- or any other unsavory historical topics, such as slavery or the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Native Americans -- contradicts your claim that I am against the teaching of uncomfortable facts. I have no problem with making people uncomfortable when there is a reason for it. Making people uncomfortable or offended just for the sake of making them so? Not so much.

Your claim that to understand racism you have to think like a racist is completely false. Sure, understanding the mindset and context of racists/racism is necessary, but this certainly doesn't require thinking like a racist.

I also never made the claim that writing a single essay/letter/paper roleplaying as a racist/bigot will make a person into one. But for youngsters predisposed to such a disposition, it will encourage them in this regard. It will also offend and/or make uncomfortable other students who feel that such attitudes are wrong -- or are one of the two racial/cultural groups in the exercise, i.e. Germans and Jews. And yes, this part of my argument deals with emotions/feelings and cultural mores. So what.

By your reasoning, it would also make sense for a teacher to assign a creative-writing story about rape, torture and murder in order to better understand such aberrant and horrendous behavior by such societal evil doers. I, on the other hand, see this as a valueless, perverted and grotesque (at best) exercise, which might encourage a few unstable/impressionable youths to consider more seriously such behavior. Not to mention how this assignment would offend/disgust many students. In other words I see nothing positive coming out of this exercise, but definitely see some significant downsides.

And just look at some of the comments in this thread, which show egregious anti-Jew bigotry. This just backs up my POV. Imagine that: a thread about a provocative learning assignment in which students are to role play Jew-hating Germans, and this then provokes numerous anti-Jewish comments. Who would'a thunk?

For the record I am an anti-zionist who thinks the term "antisemitic" is linguistically disingenuous and dismissing of other Semitic peoples, such as Arabs, so I don't use it. Yet I see how inappropriate, if not downright wrong, this assignment was, and I am calling out the people espousing bigotry towards Jews in this thread.

Calling my thoughts on the matter insane and completely wrong sounds like ad hominem hyperbole to me, but knock yourself out doing so, @HairlessApe. Sticks and stones and all that rot. We'll let the rest of the gentle readers decide on their own who sounds completely insane and wrong on this matter.

So asking people to figure out what the Jews could have done to cause Germany to hate them is wrong? This was a issue between Germans and Jews therefore anybody else can research it in anyway they feel, why do you have to be anti-semetic?

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Gotta say that while this specific subject matter and position are especially distasteful I think it's worthwhile to teach kids critical thinking in this way.

Having to go through the logical steps to argue "Jews are evil" can open the mind to all the propaganda and manipulation that goes on around you.

Not all that different from asking the kids to justify invading Iraq or bombing kids with drones.

I agree 1000%. In highschool, many moons ago, my debate teacher and one of my favorite teachers would always begin an assignment with general discussion to figure out where the kids stood on an issue, then he would assign the kids most fiercly committed to one side of the debate...to argue for the position they opposed and vice-versa. It spurred critical thinking and strong minds. There is no better way to discover the weakness of an argument or propaganda than to spend some intellectual energy defending it.

What's wrong with that? It's a legimate assignment. Whilst I seriously, and I mean seriously, jews had nothing to do with it and it's not the best assignment *BUT* it's a challenging topic to write about and so improves the students' ability to write freely about multiple topics.

Just read through this entire thread.

What if the teacher had assigned 'Young Earth Creationist' vs 'Evolutionists'? There would be just as many flags and posts, I bet.

There's nothing wrong with having kids learn how 'both sides' of an argument work. It is a VERY important skill, largely lacking in much of society today.

I think it was a good strategy. I am half-German, by descent.

NONE of my ancestors were in ANY WAY involved in the Holocaust. Yet still, Germans are vilified....just like White people are vilified over slavery. Perhaps the teacher could have also used 'slavery' as the topic. Some kids would be assigned the task of taking the part of the people who imported and instituted it; others would be assigned the task of taking the part of the Africans who sold those people as slaves to begin with.

NONE of my ancestors were in ANY WAY slave-owners.
But because I am of German descent, I am 'hated' by some groups at a visceral level that is so deep they don't even understand it. And because I am White, I am 'hated' by some groups in the same way.

Either scenario still brings up the same issue: THERE ARE THREE SIDES TO EVERY STORY. The two side involved, And the TRUTH, whch is the third side.

@ EllaMarina, 'critical thinking' means looking at an issue from all sides and deciding for one's self based on awareness of BOTH or ALL points of view.

Common Core is an educational system centralized from top down in defiance of State's rights, and it is an extension of Obama's ideology and all those around him, who are mostly Communist/Socialist. Bill Gates and Melinda Foundation funds Common Core Standards and gave money to PTA to promote it to parents. Exxon and GE are two large corporations involved in funding and promoting. Carnegie Foundation and others also give grants and funding.
Climate Change Science is a big part of the curriculum, as are many other Progressive ideologies, and it has a lot of anti-American themes.

.www.missourieducationwatchdog.com...

www.gefoundation.com...

shop.arccopy.com...

www.crisismagazine.com...

Gates is a member of the Elitist Club of Rome which has ties to UN Agenda 21

It is not surprising that schools have this kind of exercise for students.

The states sign on to the Common Core system to get Stimulus fund money and then find out that they can only control 15 % of the content.
So basically any State which signs on to this has to use the Progressive curriculum being pushed by the Obama admin.

In case anyone doubts my posting is correct,


I offer this paragraph from the OP's original article posted

Vanden Wyngaard said the exercise reflects the type of writing expected of students under the new Common Core curriculum, the tough new academic standards that require more sophisticated writing. Such assignments attempt to connect English with history and social studies.

www.timesunion.com...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Vanden Wyngaard said the exercise reflects the type of writing expected of students under the new Common Core curriculum, the tough new academic standards that require more sophisticated writing. Such assignments attempt to connect English with history and social studies.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?
'More sophisticated writing' is a bad thing? English reading and writing skills should not be connected to history and social studies?

This statement you ex-texted above makes perfect sense to me.
When I was in graduate school, they also emphasized writing skills. You'd prefer that kids/adults don't know how to write with some sophistication about world events and cumulative history issues?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Vanden Wyngaard said the exercise reflects the type of writing expected of students under the new Common Core curriculum, the tough new academic standards that require more sophisticated writing. Such assignments attempt to connect English with history and social studies.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?
'More sophisticated writing' is a bad thing? English reading and writing skills should not be connected to history and social studies?

This statement you ex-texted above makes perfect sense to me.
When I was in graduate school, they also emphasized writing skills. You'd prefer that kids/adults don't know how to write with some sophistication about world events and cumulative history issues?

edit on 16-4-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

The assignment is not sophisticated writing, it is a Progressive writing assignment straight from the Marxist/Leninist worldview.
I am not surprised that the one who accuses others of being white supremacist is now defending the very hatred that comes from the white supremacist worldview of the Nazis. Do you project much?
I am not surprised you are defending Common Core either, as you come straight from the Nanny State authoritarian mindset of the old Progressives from FDR's time and the Margaret Sangers of the world.

Interestingly, I called it for what it is before I even read the OP's posted article.

I would also add that Bill Gates involvement in UN Agenda 21, Common Core, and Planned Parenthood involves an agenda of depopulation, the abortion industry and investments in Big Pharma and vaccines.

More than a decade ago, on May 17, 2002, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had purchased shares in nine of the largest pharmaceutical companies valued at nearly $205 million. Acquiring shares in Merck, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson Wyeth, Abbott Labs, and others, the Gates Foundation continues a financial interest in common with the makers of AIDS drugs, diagnostic tools, vaccines, and contraceptives. But, the commitment to global population control goes well beyond financial interests. It is likely that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will continue its commitment to global population control, and now, curriculum creation in the nation’s schools because they truly believe that they know better than anyone else how we all should live.

This commitment to a distorted definition of social justice by Melinda and Bill Gates will likely continue because they have been led to believe that such control is what is best for people. The Core Curriculum is really just another component of population control—it is used to help teach children the “facts” about climate change and problems of over-population. Indeed, the population agenda is a trap that many wealthy, highly intelligent people have fallen into in the past. From the wealthy eugenics supporters of Planned Parenthood’s Founder Margaret Sanger, to the Rockefeller family and their population control initiatives, this work continues today through their heirs—heirs like David Rockefeller—an ally of Bill and Melinda Gates.

www.crisismagazine.com...

And there is that name again, Merck Pharmaceuticals, the Pharma company involved in the production of vaccines tainted with the AIDS virus from African green monkeys.

(NaturalNews) One of the most prominent vaccine scientists in the history of the vaccine industry -- a Merck scientist -- made a recording where he openly admits that vaccines given to Americans were contaminated with leukemia and cancer viruses. In response

www.naturalnews.com...

The thing is Progressives are still as much into eugenics and abortion as they were when they embraced Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League funded by the Rockefellers. Gates is in the thick of it.
And this is who is funding and promoting Common Core Standards in schools not just in America but worldwide.
No, I'm not a bit surprised you defend it to the core.

reply to post by beezzer


So.......they are trying to teach those students that t he Nazis were the good guys, and their victims bad? Now, where could that be leading.....? Sounds like more brainwashing. As in, when they start acting (more overtly) like the Nazis here, they can claim they aren't the ones to blame? I smell a really big rat.

Hitler hated jews, gypsies and communists. He spoke about it in mein kampf.

All religions are evil since they are based on lies. I don't count half-truths as truths. Sorry!

Jews have always been disliked the most because they are greedy capitalists and clannish to the core. You seldom see any jews working with his hands in blue collar work. Personally this don't bother me but it does bother many others. As long as no laws are broken all is fine.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


There is no such thing as progressivism in america, except for perhaps JFK and he got killed.

Conservatives like making the liberals to be "progressives" in an effort to smear the left as a whole.

I am against liberals almost as much as I am against conservatives, because for me both are conservative. Anything that accepts international capitalism as the status quo is not ok in my book. The only difference between the two is that liberals want a social welfare state attached to capitalism and the real conservatives hate this. They want all the money kept in their pockets.

True progressivism involves redistribution of wealth from the billionares and trillionares, not from the millionares. They are not necessarily socialist but they tend to be. Socialist as in a mixed economy and the workers owning the means of production. The state acting as proxy for the workers/owners of business. Communism is full/extreme "socialism".

The rockefellers and rothschilds are as progressive as me being the pope of catholicism.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

I am not surprised that the one who accuses others of being white supremacist is now defending the very hatred that comes from the white supremacist worldview of the Nazis. Do you project much?
I am not surprised you are defending Common Core either, as you come straight from the Nanny State authoritarian mindset of the old Progressives from FDR's time and the Margaret Sangers of the world.

Interestingly, I called it for what it is before I even read the OP's posted article.

Here's a handy link and a video so you can learn about Progressives.
progressive.org...
The video is very short. You might be surprised. It talks about civil liberties and fighting corporate interests. Making sure that everyone is okay.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


EarthCitizen,
I agree with almost all of your posts, and a lot of this one, too - but I don't understand why you say there is no Progressivism in the US.
Yes, there are Progressives in the US.

I hope you'll take 5 minutes to look at the link and vid in my reply to ThirdEye.

Roger Calero from Socialist Workers Party running during the 2008 national elections. Got about 10,000 votes all in all. Third parties combined usually get 1% of the total vote count.

Interesting that he says there are two classes of citizens. The billionares and everyone else.

Gary Johnson(libertarian party) and Jill Stein(green party) were also at Occupy Wall Street.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Progressive's History and Mission
Just a tiny c/p from their 'About Us' page:

It steadfastly stands against militarism, the concentration of power in corporate hands, and the disenfranchisement of the citizenry.

It champions peace, social and economic justice, civil rights, civil liberties, human rights, a preserved environment, and a reinvigorated democracy.

Its bedrock values are nonviolence and freedom of speech.

Can you please explain to me what is wrong with those things 'Progressivism' stands for?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

EarthCitizen,
I agree with almost all of your posts, and a lot of this one, too - but I don't understand why you say there is no Progressivism in the US.
Yes, there are Progressives in the US.

I hope you'll take 5 minutes to look at the link and vid in my reply to ThirdEye.

I meant widespread appeal to progressivism, not the "hope and change" of Obama.

The greens are "progressive" to an extent, but swpusa and spusa are more progressive. We also have cpusa.

All third parties combined get 1% of vote. That is what I mean by there is no progressivism. Its wayyy tooo small.

The 99% is represented by democrats???

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I meant widespread appeal to progressivism

I think there is widespread appeal to it.

How can people argue with it? The ideas, as shown in my post above, are clearly rather indisputable. At least in my mind.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

I meant widespread appeal to progressivism

I think there is widespread appeal to it.

How can people argue with it? The ideas, as shown in my post above, are clearly rather indisputable. At least in my mind.

Both national socialism and communism have been discredited over the decades by constant disinformation. The UN has been putting communist nations under the microscope and sending americans to die fighting against the spread of communism. This has taken its toll on americans and europeans alike. The McCarthy witchhunt has not ceased.

Socialism has a dirty name because people have been brainwashed to be too individualistic and too greedy, which is opposite of the ideals of marxism. In america people rush to become the next millionare. Anything that slows down individual success is seen as "progressivism" regardless if it is not. Liberalism is not progressivism!

I am no diehard progressive. I am somewhat of an accepting person and compromise rather easily.

Originally posted by beezzer

 

There are numerous ways to develop critical thinking skills. But is this teaching skills or is it teaching something more sinister?

I agree with your implication, that this kind of assignment may, to some extent, indoctrinate the kids (towards Neo-NAZI ideology). You are clearly not opposed to critical thinking skills.

If we take a step back and consider the premise, that thinking thoughts can lead to indoctrination, that is significant, IMO. All of our schooling and even higher education does exactly that, it makes us think. And for the most part the resulting "indoctrination" is desireable because it allows us to function in our society.

But even though it is desireable it is indoctrination. Thus things we consider to be true and factual are really not true or factual but instead indoctrinated. We may not know where our indoctrination ends, or, if it ends at all.

You are saying you hate the NAZIs (as even non-Jews mostly do as well). Yet the genocide of Native Americans is not scorned in that same fashion or to anywhere near that extent. You did not say "I hate the European-American settlers", and I have not heard it from many other sources.

Indoctrination?