Teacher suspended for comparing Bush to Hitler
- Thread starter frogwoman
- Start date
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Aldebaran said:
He probably thinks the nazis were socialist because the word "socialist" appears in their name.
I'd be rather annoyed if kids weren't taught about Holocaust Denial. As with Creationism kids should learn to discriminate between utter bollox and reality, they'll end up as tin easily gulled foil hatted types otherwise.jaxe said:no ones answered! tee-hee! I can just imagine you lefties squirming at the thought.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
oi2002 said:
I don't think that "jaxe" means what you've interpreted them to mean, I believe they mean that denial of the holocaust should mean that the holocaust itself isn't mentioned.
Ms Ordinary
randompointlesschemistry
nino_savatte said:
Although there's secondary schools here in London, which don't offer history as a GCSE subject because not enough students want to study it.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Ms Ordinary said:
Although there's secondary schools here in London, which don't offer history as a GCSE subject because not enough students want to study it.
I understand that there are two problems: the lack of qualified history teachers and a poor delivery of the subject which has led to student interest dropping off. I'd love to get my hands on a history class, I know how I'd teach the subject!
Truth be told, many other subjects are ideological (i would include English Literature and even Art) but history is singled out as a sort of bogeyman because it allows people to see what really happened in the past and not some narrative cooked up by the state to justify its existence.
mauvais
on reddit or something
Video: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3560566
Transcript: http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/parks/2006/03/those-who-cant-do-teach.html
I've just listened to it, and it sounds quite good to me.
Why not get students challenging the world? There's plenty wrong with it. In the correct context, his lesson is apolitical or at least nonpartisan.
Transcript: http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/parks/2006/03/those-who-cant-do-teach.html
I've just listened to it, and it sounds quite good to me.
Why not get students challenging the world? There's plenty wrong with it. In the correct context, his lesson is apolitical or at least nonpartisan.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
mauvais mangue said:http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3560566
I've just listened to it, and it sounds quite good to me.
Why not get students challenging the world? There's plenty wrong with it. In the correct context, his lesson is apolitical or at least nonpartisan.
As I understand things, the majority of the class defended the teacher. There was only one single wee git who complained.
mauvais
on reddit or something
Also, here's the PDF for the course syllabus: http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/pdf/courseSummary.pdf
The main criticism seems to be that it didn't belong in a World Geography class. Politics is a key part of what he's teaching, and his syllabus states it too. He's not pushing a specific agenda as fact either; he's just bringing stuff up and leaving it open.
The main criticism seems to be that it didn't belong in a World Geography class. Politics is a key part of what he's teaching, and his syllabus states it too. He's not pushing a specific agenda as fact either; he's just bringing stuff up and leaving it open.
frogwoman
Let them eat newts
see thats what i dont get about the american system. here the teacher would probably be given a promotion.
oh and that smug little twat that reported him should be expelled, if i was running a school i would do so for so blatantly trying to get my staff into trouble.
oh and that smug little twat that reported him should be expelled, if i was running a school i would do so for so blatantly trying to get my staff into trouble.
nino_savatte said:
mmm.. If he is US Made that sounds plausible. No US'er I ever met had a clue what socialism is about. They still see flashing lights with the words "The REDS are Coming" whenever the word "socialism" is dropped in a conversation.
It could also be that he thinks "bolshies" are Iranians
salaam.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
mauvais mangue said:
Challenging the minds of his students is a good quality in a teacher, imo.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Aldebaran said:mmm.. If he is US Made that sounds plausible. No US'er I ever met had a clue what socialism is about. They still see flashing lights with the words "The REDS are Coming" whenever the word "socialism" is dropped in a conversation.
It could also be that he thinks "bolshies" are Iranians
salaam.
Many of them think Iranians are Arabs who speak Arabic....the look on their faces when you tell them that Iranians are Persians who speak Farsi.
Of course these are the same people who look surprised when you tell them there was a ancient Jewish community in Iraq.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
frogwoman said:
The wee git will probably get courted by every single right wing institution in the country and I'm willing to bet that if Mellon Scaife hasn't signed this fucker up, Reed Irvine (or his reanimated corpse) will.
spring-peeper said:
Totally. But i get the impression from various sources that in america this is often not the case. Subscribing to the discourse demanded by political correctness together with the need to achieve 'balance' (whatever that actually means) is the quality required.
And that is of course a sad indictment of the country and where it's headed.
Not only has freedom to think one's own ideas been attacked, but now they're attacking freedom of speech. And britain's not that far behind either.
On a tangent, the pressure on Larry Summers to quit as Harvard President is interesting. Ostensibly it's because he wanted to reopen the debate as to whether or not there are inherent differences in aptitude at higher maths and physics between men and women.
What he actually claimed was the possibility of higher variance in the intelligence of men compared with women, meaning more dunces but also more brains atuned to the bizarre 'higher sciences'. This is an interesting debate, concerning such things as autism and genius.
But he was effectively hounded out by the laws of political correctness under the guise of equality.
What he actually claimed was the possibility of higher variance in the intelligence of men compared with women, meaning more dunces but also more brains atuned to the bizarre 'higher sciences'. This is an interesting debate, concerning such things as autism and genius.
But he was effectively hounded out by the laws of political correctness under the guise of equality.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
It's not so much what he said but rather the way he delivered it - it is a rant, not a lecture/teaching moment. Still, doesn't justify hmi being suspended for it.
Look at it this way - the US can't keep sucking in the massive numbers of skilled immigrants it does now to make up for it's shortfall in indiginous talent forever - something it's hugely reliant on. The Indians, Chinese and others who currently fill this role won't be around forever either as graduate students or employees and what it'll end up with is a nation of freepers who know the lesser part of fuck all about anything.
Look at it this way - the US can't keep sucking in the massive numbers of skilled immigrants it does now to make up for it's shortfall in indiginous talent forever - something it's hugely reliant on. The Indians, Chinese and others who currently fill this role won't be around forever either as graduate students or employees and what it'll end up with is a nation of freepers who know the lesser part of fuck all about anything.
slaar said:
In my view this perceived difference is more a result of social then of biological evolution/difference.
I see it as a fundamental, endemic flaw in US-style reasoning to focus so incredibly stubborn on '"science" as a "measure for all". (I call that the Einstein Obsession.)
You don't need to be even remotely interested in the study of "science" to be a genius.
salaam.
Firstly, it's not a perceived difference. There are far more men at the top of maths and physics departments. The question is whether that;s biological or socially determined. Presumably it's most likely to be a bit of both. It doesn't much matter at this point. The point is, he was raising it as a point of debate, and that debate was shut down before it even got started by people screaming "sexism". It's another example.Aldebaran said:
I quite agree, but not sure how that makes any difference to my point.
tom k&e - The genetic difference between sexes are much larger than the differences between sexes. But there's no reason per se that such an argument should be totally off limits.
slaar said:
That is still a perception that gives no reliable indication of a presence of proof in reality.
I did some reading about the functioning of the brain; There are a lot of theories about gender differences and an amount of them claims to be underscored by test- or other study results. Yet first of all such samples are not representative (and can't be) for the whole world population and secondly they can't give conclusive evidence if yes or no perceived differences are at no stage in evolution influenced by the social actors in the evolution of humanity.
When looking at it from a distance, the US society always shows an exaggerated reaction to issues others wouldn't even bother mentioning, let alone bring in the focus of public attention.
Well... You made the connection between "higher science" and "genius"
(I am sort of pre-conditioned to switch on red altert when I see or hear that word.)salaam.
slaar said:
Debate should always be encouraged, in my view.
That is comparing apples with oranges, really. There were many intertwined and/or competitive actors and frustrations behind this, depending location and circumstace. It was also in the usual way milked out and magnified in the Western press as if the whole Muslim world was day and night on the streets (and of course all of them violently).
I meant that absolutely everything can become magnified in the USA in a way you don't see elswhere. I suspect it is very difficult to see that when you are born there and grew up with it.
salaam.
All im saying is, is if there was any extreme right wing politics in the classroom, there would be endless wimpering and bitching about it on u75. Unshaven, Unprofessional "teachers", who can't keep their politics to themselves, have no place in the classroom, sure the kids can disagree, but think of all the shit theyd have to put up with outside the classroom, where what was being taught in the classroom was misinterpreted as FACT. Hell, most of you dont even deserve the title of Bolshevik, you float over to democrat, back to communist,when ever its convinient. how spineless.
Fuck, i dont see why anyone gets so humpty about all this, left-wingers have been doing this for years, when ever you are or say something, anything right of left, you get a bunch of raggedy rich kids going "Bigot!" "Nazi!"
Fuck, i dont see why anyone gets so humpty about all this, left-wingers have been doing this for years, when ever you are or say something, anything right of left, you get a bunch of raggedy rich kids going "Bigot!" "Nazi!"
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Azrael23 said:You know even Germans in the 1930`s refused to believe the CT`s who were telling them what Hitler was planning/heading towards.
Concentration camps in America are a REALITY.
Fuck off cunt.
Anyone else notice the similarity between conspiranoid wankers and those die-hard God bothering Jehovah twats intent on selling you a copy of Watchtower?
Or, more relevant to the thread, creationist teachers ramming the opinions of some deluded rich cunt down the throats of kids who never heard of Darwin?
Only a matter of time before David Icke has his own "academy"...
tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
edit
Did many of you actually read the transcript?
It was a very good lesson on political geography, the way in which two sides living seperately will view a series of events from different points of view. I didn't think he was all that baised at all, but rather painted a neutral picture, one that is not shown in our media and not expressed by our leaders.
To such a degree that once a neutral picture IS drawn, its considered biased.
That is how bad the propaganda is in America, that if you paint an even picture, instead of the patriotic USA! image that the politicians and press paint, you are considered subversive and baised against America, even anti-America.
Read the transcript, that is the sort of teacher every child should have.
It was a very good lesson on political geography, the way in which two sides living seperately will view a series of events from different points of view. I didn't think he was all that baised at all, but rather painted a neutral picture, one that is not shown in our media and not expressed by our leaders.
To such a degree that once a neutral picture IS drawn, its considered biased.
That is how bad the propaganda is in America, that if you paint an even picture, instead of the patriotic USA! image that the politicians and press paint, you are considered subversive and baised against America, even anti-America.
Read the transcript, that is the sort of teacher every child should have.
I'd have no problem with a teacher seriously presenting David Irvings work even to the extent of saying they shared his views provide they pointed out that most Historians disagree. I'd object to an institution deciding that such controversial views should be presented as equally valid as the accepted account, that's engaging in deception.jaxe said:
In a notionally free society I don't expect teachers to be politically neutral or bound by some party line laid down by the state or an institution.
Comparing Bush to Hitler is rather predictable but is useful at least to the extent that Bush was a similarly wreckless leader, who ignored expert opinion in favor of gut instinct. I'm surprised Mr Tony doesn't get compared with Mussolini, with who he shares both good and bad points.
Similar threads
