As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*


>Teachers Should ‘Be Impartial’ About Nazism and Fascism, Republican Says Sounds pretty much like how the south teachers the civil war as the war of northern aggression.


I more or less had this happen in AP US history in the Deep South. We were told that slaves were treated well in the South and their lives got worse after emancipation. We were also told the Civil War was fundamentally about state's rights, not slavery. Obviously our history is much more complex than, "The slaves were freed and then everything was okay," but the history I was taught was a disgusting smoothing over of slavery. Luckily we at least all knew this was bullshit.


Well a good portion believed that bullshit and keep pushing it. I believe had Lincoln not been assassinated it would have made things much different than now. I am surprised that AP us history would teach it that way. Did anyone even pass the ap test with a glossover like that?


Some did, I got a 3... I'm sure the teacher really did believe it. I think the kids who did well on the test did a lot of independent studying. I can't even imagine what they must have been teaching in non-AP classes.


How do the believers look around and confirm their belief that “slaves” are worse nowadays?


I think this is a great point, assuming I'm understanding it correctly, and basically gets to why the "heritage not hate", "state's rights" line of thinking is rooted in racism even if people say it's not. For all of the Southern deflection to be true, you still have to be okay with an alternate, post-Civil War timeline and existence in which it was still permitted for one human being to own another based on race. Again, that's not to say racism isn't more complex than just slavery or that only the South was and is shaped and impacted by racism. It's way more pervasive and complex than that. Honestly, my opinion now is basically that a ton of these people need lots of therapy to come to terms with the actual implications and meanings of their belief systems, but most will never get to that point.


Well, if you believe that slaves were well cared for migrant workers, who were like children needing care. And you look at a modern poor black community, you could easily believe slavery was better. Racists believe as a core value that blacks are inferior. And need to stay in their place.


I think racists are inferior and impede our progress.


Agreed. But they have been running america since its founding, and wont lightly let go.


> I believe had Lincoln not been assassinated it would have made things much different than now. If Lincoln didn't agree to a shitty VP who never went to school and was drunk at his own inauguration things would have turned out differently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Johnson#Vice_Presidency_(1865)


If only Benjamin Butler had agreed to be his veep. Or if the Republicans hadn't made the classic lib mistake of trying for a "unity government" at a moment where they held the whip hand.


Dude was pregaming.


Can you imagine being a black student that was subjected to that BS? As a white guy I would have been fuming. Can’t even imagine how much it would piss if a black student.


South, MS here. Graduated 2013. All the history learned pertaining to the civil war was extremely watered down and shortened. In fact I recall never actually learned or hearing of the "States Rights" until college US History. We were taught that the war was fought for slaves and that it was bad. This came from both black and white teachers. So either I had excellemt teachers or the subject matter was never there to begin with. We spent more time on WW2 and The Cold War than anything.


"Treated well" is such a relative term. I think I understand the subject pretty well, and as I understand it, most slaves weren't beaten, as a daily use of punishment or motivation. It doesn't serve a purpose other than to break a person, and broken people don't work. There definitely were "slave breakers" whose whole occupation was to break a person down. And there were worse plantations than others; the term "sold down the river" comes from the harsh plantations of the banks of the southern Mississippi. About a quarter of the population of the south's households owned slaves. About 1% owned 50% if I recall correctly. There were thousands of homestead, subsistence farmer families with a one room house who owned a slave. They worked the farm alongside the family, in most cases. This is how we end up with the situations that lead to Jones County seceding from the state. But, to say that slaves in America were treated well is a mischaracterization. States passed laws and formed militias for the express purpose of preventing slave uprisings. The people were not happy, and uprisings happened pretty consistently. There's some merit to the argument that things got worse before they got better. As tenant farmers of the people who formerly "owned" them, they fell into debt. Inescapable, generational, legally enforceable debt. Historians disagree on whether this is worse than slavery or not. As far as the Civil War being about state's rights, a state's right to do what? It always comes back to slavery. They said it themselves in their declarations of independence, in their constitution, in speeches and newspapers. All these sources still exist, are real, and cannot really be ignored if someone is trying to suggest that the Confederacy was not all about slavery.


>Historians disagree on whether this is worse than slavery or not. "It's just slavery with more steps."


I'd say the "it got worse before it got better" argument can be thrown out the window because it wasn't that the new system of not literally owning your workers was worse for the workers, it was just that the post civil war system was set up as punishment by a lot of butthurt plantation owners.




You aren't being "treated well" if your humanity is being denied and your inalienable rights are being trampled on. "Slaves were treated well" proceeds from a mentality that views black people as less than human beings who can properly be owned, like beasts of burden. I'm sure there were differences from owner to owner as to how much physical cruelty they dished out. It also depended on what role the enslaved person was playing. I'm sure domestic servants were "treated better" than field hands. Nicole Hannah-Jones documented in The 1619 Project that owners developed a science of cruelty, that calculated the optimum number of beatings to extract maximum profits from each slave.


Your AP teacher sucked.


It is true that some slaves were treated well enough that they stayed on the plantation after being freed to continue working for money, but I can't help but wonder how rare that was. I'd bet a good portion of the reason for those occurrences is that people find comfort with what they know. If you've never been off the plantation, how the fuck would you just go start a new life somewhere else where you don't know anyone?? LOTS of middle class people stay in abusive relationships even today. There is probably a parallel there.


Stockholm syndrome.


In the case of middle class people staying together I think it has more to do with wanting to maintain their lifestyle and realizing they might not be able to afford the McMansion if they split. I know people who despise their spouse but are staying together because otherwise they won’t be able to afford as many things for themselves. So they continue to live a lie.


I too remember this and was almost held back because I called bullshit. I legit had a meeting with all the principals and the teacher where they had to watch me write out their version of history.


Thing is, read the secession articles for each state. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/reasons-secession


The civil was about the state's rights and not about slavery..... It was about the state's right to own slaves!


I think it's good to teach that emancipation wasn't all sunshine and rainbows, and the freed slaves (sorry, prisoners with jobs - which is what they are today!) lived happily ever after. Everything else though? Yeah, BS.


I dont remeber this, im in Texas, maybe we had different curriculum. Was still AP, im class 2020 tho so maybe it was a recent change. Took a college class on Texas and UShistory and learned there was a lot of stuff on the civil war that was not talked about in highschool, the picture was painted much better in the college textbooks.


I'm in Texas and old enough to be your grandpa. We didn't have AP when I was in school, but our history classes were DEFINITELY focused on whitewashing the South in the Civil War.


My roommate in college had to go through a bit of deprogramming with that. He went to school in the deep south and also held these views. He would often say that black people were better off as slaves because they had housing and they were investments for the owners. They were super expensive so slave owners would do all they could to ensure that they were kept well like making sure they regularly saw doctors and such. It took so long to get him to recognize that this was all bullshit, but even if it was all true, that doesn't make it okay to own another person as property!!!


>Indiana state senator Scott Baldwin made the comments, ***which he has since backtracked, during a committee meeting Wednesday.*** also >Baldwin later told the Indianapolis Star he’d been unclear in his comments and said that ***it’s fine to teach kids that Nazism and fascism are, indeed, bad.***


Isn't this how they usually operate with inflammatory comments? Say something terrible, then backtrack later knowing the people that need to hear it don't?


The midterm elections is all the hope we have left for Democracy or this stuff will be national policy soon.


I think the worlds societies have yet to learn how to effectively deal with the "*Shh-sh-shshshsh it's okay.. just relax..."* approach to social assault. American society certainly hasn't.


They aren't impartial though. They teach that war against America was patriotic and morally right because slavery is great for the economic ruling class.


Depends on your school district. I live in South Carolina and was never taught the war of Northern aggression or that slaves were treated well.


This is not your average, everyday stupid. This is advanced stupid.


it's not stupidity, it's evil


No, it’s Patrick.


Let historians and educators decide how best to teach about the evils of man, not politicians trying to score electoral points with an angry base.


Okay, but we impartially agree that the genocide of 6 million Jews was a hideous stain on history from which we will vow to never again allow to happen, right?


(Anakin meme stare) ….*right?!*


Did you forget about Charlottesville?


Oh, the one with "good people" on both sides? /s


many fine people..... my eye is twitching.




Lol never again allow. We’ve already had about a half holocausts worth of genocide since then, with a potential mini-caust in the starting stages in a few places.


Yeah but those are not politically advantageous. So we won't do anything about them other than tweet our displeasure over it ruining our morning coffee.


The guy says exactly that in the article.


I’m completely impartial in my opinions on Nazis. They were objectively terrible humans shouldn’t be a divisive opinion


My grandfather's generation went to war against them for a reason.


Exactly, the only impartial statement about Nazis is that they were terrible. Anything different is delusional.


> Exactly, the only impartial statement about Nazis is that they were terrible. Anything different is delusional. That's not being impartial. Impartial would be to list the millions of people they murdered, the various atrocities they committed, the honest truth about the things they did, and allow the students to decide for themselves weather or not industrial-scale murder is a good thing or not.


Not bad scientists.


They were terrible scientists. They purged the German scientific and academic community of anyone that did not conform to their ethnic or political norms. That is bad for science. They also didn’t conform to international norms of scientific ethics, I don’t think I need I need to elaborate on that point.


I mean, there was a reason we raced the Soviets to Berlin. We wanted the German scientists. Wernher von Braun put us on the moon...


Lol we definitely wanted the scientists, but that had NOTHING to do with the race to berlin. Not sure where you heard this as Von Braun himself was captured no where near Berlin. They didnt keep the brains in the capital city (as hitlers presence proved) as it was bombed constantly. The race to berlin was a mix of pride, and of post war posturing.


I love it when people are so sure of themselves, yet so wrong. The race was about getting mainly the nuclear scientists out of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute. Yes Von Braun was captured at the V2 assembly plant in Mittelwerk. But to suggest that there were no "brains" in Berlin is naive at best. "After the Allies agreed at the Yalta Conference to specific zones of influence within Germany, the two Soviet armies raced to win control of Berlin, motivated by a desire to gain control of the German nuclear research program in the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute before the Americans." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_Berlin You should also check out operation Epsilon and Paperclip since you want to appear to know so much about WW2.


Um as anyone who would bother to read the article you posted would know, the competition you are using to prove your point was between the two SOVIET generals Stalin was playing off eachother to take Berlin first (Even though Zhukov was clearly chosen for it). The western allies did not even attempt to get to Berlin after the Yalta conference in any real way partially because defusing Stalin was seen as a higher priority. Here is a quote from the article you posted. >The Soviet advance and ultimate capture of the German capital was not opposed by the Western Allies The race to berlin was an internal soviet competition. The western allies did not try to get to any scientitists first. The german nuclear program was famously underperforming, both because of a lack of interest from nazi officials and because of the purge of the intellectuals that made up the german foundation of nuclear theory. Nuclear scientists in berlin may have been enticing for the USSR, but it didnt even come into the calculation for the US or other western powers. This is why the race to berlin, the article you posted mind you, was between two Soviet generals lol. Nazi germany was best at rocket and jet tech, which were the priorities of paper clip. These scientists were NOT in berlin. In fact I think the nuclear scientists you mentioned were the only scientist in berlin at that point, particularly because they were not even participating in experiments. Also, if you feel the need to alter quotes to fit your narrative, you might not be as informed as you think. Here is the actual unedited quote you cited. >After the Allies agreed at the Yalta Conference to specific zones of influence within Germany, the two Soviet armies raced to win control of Berlin, perhaps motivated by a desire to gain control of the German nuclear research program in the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute before the Americans Your whole point is based off conjecture on a wikipedia article. Here is a quote from the Uranium Club article that is relevant. >At the close of World War II, the Soviet Union had special search teams operating in Austria and Germany, especially in Berlin, to identify and obtain equipment, material, intellectual property, and personnel useful to the Soviet atomic bomb project. This clearly shows the soviets (and them alone post yalta) had interest in nuclear scientists in berlin. We also know that Stalin played his generals off one another in a rush to berlin. However, neither of these things equal everyone rushing to berlin to try to steal away all the scientists. They had no need to as the scientist they stole away were largely based in places of, you know, science and testing which had already been captured by then. Kaiser Wilhelm did not even have any attempts at a reactor and the prize was mostly the intellectual property. Especially as they had pretty much no material to work with at that point due to sabotage and supply stoppage. I think you are mixing up two entirely different parts of the war, especially invoking paperclip and epsilon which both have jack shit to do with the race to berlin lol.


You might need to read up on Operation Paperclip


I’m fully aware of it as well as the history of the Nazi state. My point is, if I show up to a house with 20 scientists in it, and I kill or imprison 10,of them, I do not have a good science program because I threw away half my resources for non-scientific reasons.


...sigh. Too soon I guess.


Being Nazi has no influence on the quality of science one can produce.


“Don’t judge. Lampshades made of human skin are a matter of personal taste,” Republican says.


While that's hilarious, I (always) feel obligated to point out that no lampshades were ever made of human skin (at least not by the Nazis.) They did, however, kill millions of people in extreme ways. That's impartiality, baby.


The Nazis disagree (of course they do)


According to this chart [here](https://ibb.co/TcMFRMN) you are SO wrong.


You got me there that is pretty irrefutable


All my history teachers were impartial when relaying to us that fascism and Nazism lead to the deaths of 11 million people in camps and countless others to war and starvation.


But were they the right people, or the wrong people? This is literally the Republican stance now.


That’s bad, but the real number is worse. Nazism directly lead to the death of between 50 to 70 million people.


Can you elaborate? I’ve not heard that number before and I’d be interested in learning more


Soon they'll be demanding we call WW2 "the war of Jewish aggression" or something..


Oh really... because, funny, now that you mention it, nazism and fascism are the antithesis of impartiality. In fact, it's logically absurd to be impartial towards fascism and nazism, when we have history books.


The paradox of tolerance is that it must be fervently intolerant of intolerance Edit: changed oxymoron to paradox


It's funny how we say this as an axiom and the right says it as a gotchya to debunk tolerance, thinking that they've made a clever point.


I think paradox is the better fit


It definitely is! Lemme edit that


"You can't have these kids thinking that fascism is bad, Republicans won't win any more elections." -Tucker Carlson ^probably


Tucker was just crowned “Most Important Person in the World” by Alex Jones so you could say things are going great.


But the (R) pedophiles must not be discussed.


Nazis in congress be like: Yo treat the nazis with respect and don't jump to any conclusions.


in what bizaro world are nazis and other fascists not objectively human filth, not worthy of being put out if they were on fire? oh, that's right, in bizaro republiQan world. right. got it, thanks. >Indiana state senator Scott Baldwin made the comments, which he has since backtracked, ahhhh, the same old "j/k, didn't mean it. what I said was actually satire and I didn't mean it" bit.


When this clown says "impartial", what he means is "non-judgemental". When we're talking about people who called themselves the Master Race and committed genocide, failing to judge them is not impartiality: it's collaboration.


Well, I mean, is it REALLY all that shocking that Modern-day NAZIS and FASCISTS calling themselves 'Republicans' would want to put a positive spin on the inhuman monsters they idolize?


““We just provide the facts,” Baldwin said. “The kids formulate their own viewpoints.”” The fact is the Nazis killed 6 million jews. Saying that was bad of them is not “forcing a viewpoint on a child” Call this a hot take but children should be chastised if they determine the jews deserved to be holocausted.


>Teachers Under a Fascist Regime Have to ‘Be Impartial’ About Nazism and Fascism FTFY


How the **fuck** is someone supposed to be, "impartial" about fascism? I mean, JFC.


I mean, the right is in favor of it, and that's what this really is, so.


The GOP, ladies and gentlemen...


> “I believe that we've gone too far when we take a position on those isms .… We need to be impartial.”


I bet he makes an exception for liberalism.


If the definition of "impartial" is teaching the accurate historical facts without commentary, I agree.


I wonder if the Jewish people thought that right before they were killed?!?!? There is NO IMPARTIAL THOUGHT on Nazisim, they are EVIL and a threat to ALL! Except if you are one, clearly most Republicans are.


Spoken like a Nazi.


Didn't we fight a major war against Nazism and Fascism?


Yes, but the Republicans are now fans of it


But they aren’t being called out on it. It is oh let’s play nice. They are trying to overthrow the country.


Was Scott Baldwin wearing his hood and robe when he made this statement?


Is that like being "impartial" to slavery?


Teacher here. This will absolutely not work the way conservatives and republicans want this to work. See, there’s this little thing called the internet that makes this problematic. When students only had access to what was in the textbook and what was told in class, you absolutely could control the narrative way more. Now? Forget it. Kids love correcting their teachers and will do it all the time and will look up something right away just to be right about it. Easy solution? Make it a web quest project. “Go research the holocaust and bring back what you find. Please also research how Germany handles the understanding of naziism. Wait, you didn’t find any upsides? What about anything good the nazis did? Nothing there either? Yes, their general lack of care for human life did allow for some major advances in medicine since they didn’t care about what happened to the people they tested it on. Yes that is horrible.” The same thing is happening with all the book banning nonsense. These people are essentially advertising to kids a list of books they should go and read simply because they were told they couldn’t. Book not at your school library? Go check the public library. Not their either? Buy it online. Don’t want it in your house? Buy a digital copy and read it that way. Don’t want to buy it? Pirate it (most likely solution) or borrow it. Until these out of touch conservative morons start trying to control the internet, I’m not too worried about these things.


These "out of touch conservatives" you talk about have assistance. Like the information that you point out, disinformation is also at their fingertips. And social media is the choice of reference for many. Be worried. Overconfidence is how we got to this point.


And now you know one of many reasons why these same types of people are fighting against making the internet a public utility.


Fuck no. Source - Teacher/Long Time Educator


remember the days not so long ago when everybody agreed that Nazis were bad, and the people who said otherwise were also considered bad? Pepperidge Farm remembers.


if there’s a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.


Indiana state senator Scott Baldwin made the comments, which he has since backtracked, during a committee meeting Wednesday.


As far back as I can remember, I’ve hated our state senators because they all just suck so much. Braun might be worse than Baldwin, though.


I'm pretty sure you can't backtrack support for Nazis.


But not about communism, I'm sure. Teachers should be impartial and teach that all of them got a bunch of people killed for no good reason, and that Nazism and fascism were specifically designed that way.


Churches should “be impartial” to the devil


No they should not,[ defending tolerance requires intolerance of the intolerant.](https://external-preview.redd.it/eQiwBfkb2HZEbl0q3kdcBSVJ1QF4IwReFhbA2NosN6A.jpg?auto=webp&s=0dd7cbf80458ac7062e687cc2921b1863e6b0123)


Ah, so they DO know what the “fa” in antifa stands for.


There's only one word for this sort of behavior - GROOMING


It’s because the Republican Party is Fascists…like the Nazi’s were. They are taking America and doing right in front of our noses. Rise up America before it’s too late.


I'm starting to wonder if that 'Operation Paperclip' thing had an unforeseen consequence or two.


And murder, and torture, and cheating, and everything else Republicans represent


Ok fine. But then we also get to be impartial about Communism. I’m sure you’ll have no problem with that whatsoever, right GOP? Or maybe this is all a bunch of hooey


Very curious as to what they would say but, does that mean being impartial to communism and socialism as well?


> Baldwin later told the Indianapolis Star he’d been unclear in his comments and said that it’s fine to teach kids that Nazism and fascism are, indeed, bad. Whoops.


Classic GOP. The lie makes the headline and the redaction makes page 7.


I mean you can be perfectly impartial about the Nazi's, the cold facts are more horrifying than any editorializing you could possibly do. It'd be weird however to not engage in discussions around "how could this happen", "how could the Nazi's disregard humanity in such a manner", ethonationalist populist structures, the banality of evil etc. there's not "another side" to present here though it's more a question around the nature of (hu)man etc.


Here's a fun game, these nouns can be used interchangeably, with little change in meaning: 1) Nazis Should ‘Be Impartial’ About Republicans and Fascists, Teachers Say 2) Republicans Should ‘Be Impartial’ About Nazis and Fascists, Teachers Say the possibilities are endless /s I like #2 the best


No, no they shouldn’t. And neither should you.


We’re doomed


Agreed. There are two sides to Nazism. The Bad&Breathing Nazis and the Good&Decaying Nazis. Know which one is better...


But yeah, its totally a "communist takeover" happening in America right now. 🙄


Yes, bc we wouldn’t want to ignore all of the positive sides to the Holocaust, as well as all the great ideas the Nazis had. /s


Nazis and fascism are bad. That IS the impartial view.


Yeah, in the south, where they won’t let the time when they revolted on the Union go, though it was over 150 years ago, they pride themselves on the states rights’ bullshit, but yeah, what state right was it in particular? Oh yeah, the ownership of another human being, such a Christian ideal, truly. Look into how the southern Baptist church divorced itself the Baptist church, yep, owning other humans


Nazism and fascism is what most of the world made war to annihilate. There is no room for any tolerance or impartiality now, when we know full well the extent of their criminality.


Look, it's one thing to get your ass kicked, it's another thing to oppress people over it. This GOP vision is a narrowest sliver of the saddest noddl3


Nazis and fascism is far from good. Sounds like someone form those parties saying that.


How about no? Like how much more do they need say before people see them for what the R party has become. How messed up in the head do you need to be to even think that statement is anything but disgraceful???


But not against socialism. That’s an evil word!


This dude is a skinhead can he be called out as such by a democrat with balls? He showed up on the oath keepers leak and he’s part of the commie fascist Republican cult. Call him out!


You cannot be impartial to evil.


What’s partial about explaining what the nazis did? There is no narrative needed to show why nazis are evil, you simply show what they did and it is obvious. I wish people like this would please explain what the “impartial narrative” would look like


But not socialism. No no. Must be very partial about that. And make sure the students know that every single Democrat is turning our country towards that. Now send my state some more Federal money.


I’m raising my kids to be socialists…paying over 20k per birth wasn’t ideal 😶




They’re impartial about communism


Ergo that guy is a nazi , very clear.


“Racism isn’t a concept we need to teach.” “Nazis aren’t bad, though!” ???


hmm. kinda sounds like the “too much tolerance” stuff we’ve been hearing about from conservatives for the past however many years. projection again, I guess.


Wow, remember when it was about dog whistles and subtle nods to racism? They used to at least pretend they weren't racist while turning the "OK" hand gesture into a white pride symbol. Now all subtlety is gone and they're like "Don't judge those Nazis so harshly!"


Real impartiality would entail the fact that the US and UK were aware of the holocaust as early as 1942, all the turning away Jewish refugees


Indoctrination is the opposite of education.


Pretty sure there was a whole world war type thing that went down that is counter to this. Country Fight... 2? Earth Battle Round 2? Something like that. Either way, the Nazi's and facists lost **fucking hard**.


Nazis should be thrown in jail, not for their ideologies, but for their willingness to stand by a group that perpetrated a genocide. They're as crazy as groupies for serial killers.


And communism and socialism too, right? ...right???


How about we teach kids satanism in Sunday school then.


I bet he loves Israel, though.


Why wouldn't he? I doubt there's a square inch of soil there that hasn't been drenched with human blood at some point in its history.


This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3v3jm/indiana-senator-impartial-nazism-fascism) reduced by 61%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Some of the items in the Holocaust Trunk used by a. A Republican Indiana state senator took a moment to question last week whether teachers would be crossing some sort of boundary by having a position on Nazism and fascism in their classrooms and stressed the need to be "Impartial." > A section of the legislation would also bar teachers from affecting "Students' attitudes, habits, traits, opinions, beliefs, or feelings" when teaching certain subjects, according to the Washington Post. > Baldwin later told the Indianapolis Star he'd been unclear in his comments and said that it's fine to teach kids that Nazism and fascism are bad. "When I was drafting this bill, my intent with regard to 'political affiliation' was to cover political parties within the legal American political system. In my comments during committee, I was thinking more about the big picture and trying to say that we should not tell kids what to think about politics," Baldwin said. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/s0vuh3/teachers_should_be_impartial_about_nazism_and/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~616850 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **teach**^#1 **fascism**^#2 **Baldwin**^#3 **political**^#4 **Nazism**^#5


Id like to see a few examples of what that means exactly in an educational setting.


Um what?


Nazism and Fascism is impartially bad


That's one thing the former administration maximized on and did very well: the usage of test balloons. Say something outrageous, let it float in the ether for a while, knowing it'll draw the attention or support of the fringe, then "apologize" for it to soothe the nerves of your more moderate constituents, or those who would just rather the quiet part be never said out loud. This is the legacy from the last four years we're going to have to deal with from now on in this country. Various GOP politicians taking pages from a proto-fascist's playbook, and widening the cracks in our society even further.


… Nazi state senator proposes


Lol fucking *WHAT*?


I agree. Impartially, the Nazis and fascism generally were and are a disease on the body politic. Impartially, I also know that cancer needs to be destroyed before it kills the body and that eating arsenic is deadly


Teachers Should ‘Be Impartial’ About Nazism and Fascism, ~~Republican~~ Fascist Nazi Says. Fixed it.


[what the hell](https://youtu.be/JtgYTaQ3-nk)


Wait, what?


WTF is wrong with these idiots? Is it brain damage?


And communism! If we are talking innocent body count and human rights violations. All the above. Wait, when they mean impartial they do mean pointing out all the atrocious things that happened right and not washing history? If that’s what they meant well holy crap and f$&k them.


Yeah, me thinks this person is having a mental health emergency. 🤫


Did they get run out of town!?


Wait, you mean the world hasn't been impartial enough about how scummy the Nazis were? We haven't been impartial about how a man who looks NOTHING like the Aryans he preached about, went round brainwashing German minors into believing his "race superiority" BS? We haven't been impartial enough calling them monsters for the atrocities committed during the holocaust? If you look at what the Nazis did, and **DON'T** see any wrong with that, then *YOU* are clearly the provlem.


Exactly. They have been pretty impartial teaching about this for decades. That's why everyone has a negative impression of Nazism: it was fucking terrible, and that's the result an impartial reading of the facts gives.


because putin trump nazism has taken over the gop and fox news


Are we still at the point where people look at me weird when i say America is getting way too flirty with nazism?


This should open some eyes !


It depends on what they mean by impartial. You can be impartial and still state the facts that show the horrible things that came from those ideologies. I have a feeling that’s not what they mean, however.


It's indiana. The klan just went underground. Then decided to come out loud and proud the last few years.


Man, these fuckers are really terrified by brown people. What cowards.


No problem, so long as they can be portrayed as a death cult that conducted a genocide and caused a world war that killed 70+ million people.