Alternate Holocaust narrative

[Concart]

When I was in school, I was taught that the Holocaust involved Nazis rounding up and exterminating six million Jews in concentration camps.

But Texas, being the progressive openminded state that it is has insisted that texts teach an alternate narrative. Maybe some 'conservatives' here can lay out those alternative narratives. I'm interested.

[Flash]

When I was in school, I was taught that the Holocaust involved Nazis rounding up and exterminating six million Jews in concentration camps.

But Texas, being the progressive openminded state that it is has insisted that texts teach an alternate narrative. Maybe some 'conservatives' here can lay out those alternative narratives. I'm interested.

Not true. One curriculum specialist used that as an example to meet the new Texas law requiring controversial subjects to be approached from differing perspectives. She suggested if a teacher had a book in the classroom on the Holocaust to include a book on the "other side." She realized she used a poor example and the superintendent apologized saying they recognized there was not another side to the Holocaust.

The Texas law was aimed at teaching critical race theory but nobody is clear how to meet the requirements of the law and she used a poor example.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

Not true. One curriculum specialist used that as an example to meet the new Texas law requiring controversial subjects to be approached from differing perspectives. She suggested if a teacher had a book in the classroom on the Holocaust to include a book on the "other side." She realized she used a poor example and the superintendent apologized saying they recognized there was not another side to the Holocaust.

The Texas law was aimed at teaching critical race theory but nobody is clear how to meet the requirements of the law and she used a poor example.

I was wondering just exactly what 'the other side' story was. WWII didn't happen?

[moon]

When I was in school, I was taught that the Holocaust involved Nazis rounding up and exterminating six million Jews in concentration camps.

So it did- but it also involved the rounding up and extermination of up to 14 million other minorities-- Roma, Gypsies , coloured folk, the handicapped , etc ., anybody considered a threat to the purity of the white Aryan ' race'.
You should have been taught that the slaughter of Jews is known as ' the Shoah ' and that of the Gypsies as ' the Devouring ' etc., components of the overall Holocaust . The Holocaust was never a Jewish-only episode, Jews forming fewer than a third of its victims.

[Flash]

Hello Flash,

I was wondering just exactly what 'the other side' story was. WWII didn't happen?

I guess you could include the reasons given by the Germans to commit such acts. That does not mean you are justifying it.

However, no one in Texas was suggesting there was "another side" to the Holocaust. It was just a bad example used to try to explain to teachers how they might be in compliance with the new law requiring a diversity of views on controversial subjects.
Parents are upset because they think critical race theory will teach their children that they are oppressors.

You now have both the left and right turning to politically correct efforts not to hurt anyone's feelings or say anything that will offend them.

[Jack]

'One side' is the industrial scale size of exterminating a group of people.
Maybe the 'other side' is a more insidious way of exterminating people?
Or maybe the 'other side' is Indoctrination Camps?
Maybe teaching 'Inclusiveness'?

Maybe 'Flash' is right?

[Nordberg]

The other side is some of the Nazis were good people. Some of the Jews were bad people. In Charlottesville, Trump explained it.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

I guess you could include the reasons given by the Germans to commit such acts. That does not mean you are justifying it.

However, no one in Texas was suggesting there was "another side" to the Holocaust. It was just a bad example used to try to explain to teachers how they might be in compliance with the new law requiring a diversity of views on controversial subjects.
Parents are upset because they think critical race theory will teach their children that they are oppressors.

You now have both the left and right turning to politically correct efforts not to hurt anyone's feelings or say anything that will offend them.

I never got what was wrong with teaching CRT.

There is nothing offensive or racist about it.

As usual, the right has been led down a huge rabbit hole by the spinners.

[Controlled Opposition]

The Devil is in the details. Questioning some of those details is not holocaust denial.

[Flash]

Hello Flash,

I never got what was wrong with teaching CRT.

There is nothing offensive or racist about it.

As usual, the right has been led down a huge rabbit hole by the spinners.

I think it is inappropriate to teach any political ideology. Of course, it all depends on what is included in the nebulous term CRT. It is actually a concept from law school dealing with racially discriminatory laws, but it has been expanded to mean whatever the proponents or opponents want it to mean.

If it involves, for example, white students having to stand up and admit their white privilege or that they are oppressors that is inappropriate education. Even if you believe that is true, it is no more appropriate than having a kid stand and admit they are obese. It is poor education. There are too many other useful things to teach in education besides anything to create more racial conflict.

[Celticguy]

Not true. One curriculum specialist used that as an example to meet the new Texas law requiring controversial subjects to be approached from differing perspectives. She suggested if a teacher had a book in the classroom on the Holocaust to include a book on the "other side." She realized she used a poor example and the superintendent apologized saying they recognized there was not another side to the Holocaust.

The Texas law was aimed at teaching critical race theory but nobody is clear how to meet the requirements of the law and she used a poor example.

Holocaust is not controversial. It happened, ample proof.

[Flash]

Holocaust is not controversial. It happened, ample proof.

True. That is why the superintendent apologized for the suggestion made by the curriculum specialist. And, nobody is sure what topics would be included under the new law.

If anyone wants an alternative view read the posts by Jeffrey Spaeth on JPP. He says it did not happen.

[evince]

The woman who said this claimed that example had come up from the concerned parents



They wanted alternate facts to the Holocaust offered in school

[evince]

The Devil is in the details. Questioning some of those details is not holocaust denial.

Questioning known history in this case is neo nazi bullshit

[evince]

I think it is inappropriate to teach any political ideology. Of course, it all depends on what is included in the nebulous term CRT. It is actually a concept from law school dealing with racially discriminatory laws, but it has been expanded to mean whatever the proponents or opponents want it to mean.

If it involves, for example, white students having to stand up and admit their white privilege or that they are oppressors that is inappropriate education. Even if you believe that is true, it is no more appropriate than having a kid stand and admit they are obese. It is poor education. There are too many other useful things to teach in education besides anything to create more racial conflict.

Teach what the prevailing stances of all are


That is teaching