Don't forget the OTHER side of the Holocaust

[rambot]

Are we still talking about sociology?

Like have the teacher psychoanalyze the students?

nope

 

[Ana the Ist]

nope

Then I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

[rambot]

Then I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I was referring to the idea that, what some people interpret as "blame" can be little more than an explanation of events. It's a matter of our own perception and not an event.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

They are not matters of public policy either.

But they are social affairs.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I don't think the holocaust is considered a current event.

See post #31.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I was referring to the idea that, what some people interpret as "blame" can be little more than an explanation of events.

I can't think of even a hypothetical scenario where that would be true. Words like "blame" have rather specific meanings.

Definition of BLAME

A teacher could probably state at the very beginning of the school year that absolutely every student is completely blameless for anything they learn in history or current events.

.It's a matter of our own perception and not an event.

Right...but given a situation like the one above, I don't see how the teacher can be blamed for the misconceptions of the class.

 

[Ana the Ist]

See post #31.

It's possible that you misread the wording of the regulations.

no teacher shall be compelled by a policy of any
state agency, school district, campus, open-enrollment charter
school, or school administration to discuss current events or
widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy
or social affairs

I don't see how the holocaust would fit into either of those categories.

 

[Ana the Ist]

See post #31.

It's possible that you misread the wording of the regulations.

no teacher shall be compelled by a policy of any
state agency, school district, campus, open-enrollment charter
school, or school administration to discuss current events or
widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy
or social affairs

I don't see how the holocaust would fit into either of those categories.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's possible that you misread the wording of the regulations.

no teacher shall be compelled by a policy of any
state agency, school district, campus, open-enrollment charter
school, or school administration to discuss current events or
widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy
or social affairs

I don't see how the holocaust would fit into either of those categories.

The second category is both vague and subjective. You and I might not consider them controversial or widely debated, but Holocaust deniers exist, and they would disagree vehemently.

Unless the bill lays out what constitutes "widely debated and currently controversial" or establishes a means to determine what is, it has a major flaw - which is my objection, and the objection being voiced by the administrator in the article posted by the OP.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The second category is both vague and subjective. You and I might not consider them controversial or widely debated, but Holocaust deniers exist, and they would disagree vehemently.

The mere existence of people who disagree with something doesn't make it "widely debated". Holocaust deniers make up a tiny percentage of people who know about the holocaust. You can say the details of the holocaust are debated...but not widely debated. It certainly isn't currently controversial.

 

[RDKirk]

Texas book controversy: School administrator told teachers to include Holocaust books with 'opposing' views when explaining new state law - CNN

I chose CNN cause I'm lazy. I'm positive you can find any one of a number of other sites commenting on this case.

My first question is this:
Do you think this school administrator ACTUALLY wants "the opposing view of the holocaust" in the classroom or do you think they did this bring attention to the sheer folly of this ludicrous bill?




With that said, perhaps that's just all a dog and pony show.
Here is the bill itself:
Texas HB3979 | 2021-2022 | 87th Legislature

What is this even? How is this not disconcerting to ANYONE that governments can dictate this kind of nonsense?

Check it out...look what you CANNOT do in Social Studies class:
That's the OPPOSITE of what should happen.
Social studies teachers should be WANTING to have these conversations. How can we expect adults to grow up and be able to have tough conversations without giving them a chance to practice and learn how as kids?

When did America become so lily white that they hated having tough conversations on tough subjects? Was it when folks started suggesting that maybe members of certain races are still able to exert power over other races whether formally or informally, consciously or subconsciously?

Another one:
On the surface this sounds reasonable. But this is written by a politician and not an educator.
For example:
How quick will they be to say that Communism and Socialism are JUST AS GOOD as capitalism.
And
Equality is good. But racism is also really good and totally level and beneficial for society too.

I guess that means politicians can no longer go to school and present themeslves and the policies they are fighting for.



The use of the word "blame" here is highly suspect and, in my opinion, could easily be taken to a challenge.

And number 6, what a shambles. But that said I can imagine more than a few people are just SALIVATING over that.

I assure you that the Texas legislature is performing continuous dog-and-pony shows to distract attention from the fact that not a darned thing has been done to prevent another power grid failure.

 

[RDKirk]

What exactly is the other side of those issues? That the Holocaust was good for the Jews or treatment of the Uighyers is good for them and society? I learned all about the Holocaust in school. The teachers didn't actually have to talk about the "morality" if it all. As if there is a lot of material out there stating the Holocaust was a wonderful event and Hitler was a saint.

This is just patently dumb.

Actually, I would take the time to walk through the events of the Weimar Republic situation that allowed the German people to be led down that path.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The mere existence of people who disagree with something doesn't make it "widely debated". Holocaust deniers make up a tiny percentage of people who know about the holocaust. You can say the details of the holocaust are debated...but not widely debated. It certainly isn't currently controversial.

Again, subjective. How would you go about proving to someone who denies the Holocaust that it isn't widely debated or controversial? You can't, because there is no objective standard for "widely debated" and the bill doesn't establish one. The Holocaust isn't a great example of a truly borderline case, but it has achieved its purpose of getting people to talk about it.

Moreover, some things that most people would agree are widely debated don't really have two sides to teach objectively. For instance, the insistence by a large segment of the American political right that Trump actually won the 2020 election.

 

[rambot]

I assure you that the Texas legislature is performing continuous dog-and-pony shows to distract attention from the fact that not a darned thing has been done to prevent another power grid failure.

Well, there's friends to enrich RDKirk!

 

[rjs330]

But they are social affairs.

No they are not. The only place it was a matter of that was in Germany.

Why don't we pick a current topic to discuss where this law would actually apply?

How about Bidens handling of the Afghan withdraw? That could be a school discussion.

 

[rambot]

No they are not. The only place it was a matter of that was in Germany.

It's currently becoming more popular in the us. Boom! Relevant again!
discussion.

 

[rjs330]

The second category is both vague and subjective. You and I might not consider them controversial or widely debated, but Holocaust deniers exist, and they would disagree vehemently.

Unless the bill lays out what constitutes "widely debated and currently controversial" or establishes a means to determine what is, it has a major flaw - which is my objection, and the objection being voiced by the administrator in the article posted by the OP.

You cannot believe that the Holocaust is a widely debated and current controversial topic do you?

 

[rjs330]

Actually, I would take the time to walk through the events of the Weimar Republic situation that allowed the German people to be led down that path.

No doubt. We are talking current though. Not history. And covering that is a matter of history and not a current controversial issue. Just like the revolutionary war.

 

[rjs330]

It's currently becoming more popular in the us. Boom! Relevant again!
discussion.

Becoming more popular doesn't mean it's a current issue. It's still a 60 year old situation. Where on earth is it a widely debated current issue of public policy in Texas?

 

[rjs330]

Another thing many are missing is the law says people cannot be compelled to talk about these things.

no teacher shall be compelled by a policy of any
state agency, school district, campus, open-enrollment charter
school, or school administration to discuss current events or
widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy
or social affairs

So a teacher cannot be compelled to talk about current events or widely debated and current controversial issues of public policy. So if a teacher does not want to talk about CRT they can't be compelled to do so.

If they do, then they have to present pros and cons to the issue. A full look. That would also include conservative teachers as well.