Book Banning

Even though they hated communism, feminism, gays, jews, slavs, people with handicaps they were leftists. Because of the S in the name, you see.
The SA boys were a bunch of butt grabbers lol. They hated marxist socialism, which is not the only way to define socialism. As a matter of fact they were against capitalism and marxism in equal measure. Socialism didn’t come to life because of feminism, it has nothing to do with it. The French revolution and the first feminist wave are almost 200 years apart lmao. The nazis were quite open about collaboration between different nations. Your “they hated x” is a bunch of dogs. There were soldiers of every background fighting for the nazis.

you had cossacks
DETAIL_PICTURE_731789_80547764.jpg

muslims
220px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1973-116-11%2C_Waffen-SS%2C_13._Gebirgs-Div._%22Handschar%22.jpg

Even indians
images

Is this joggin your noggin?
Just because you don’t like the fact that nazis were true socialists it doesn’t change the fact that they were.

Edit: everyone has skeletons in their closet and MSM and education wants you to believe the left is clean despite evidence to the contrary. The Democratic party in the US voted for slavery and the Republicans freed black people from slavery.
 
Last edited:
The SA boys were a bunch of butt grabbers lol. They hated marxist socialism, which is not the only way to define socialism. As a matter of fact they were against capitalism and marxism in equal measure. Socialism didn’t come to life because of feminism, it has nothing to do with it. The French revolution and the first feminist wave are almost 200 years apart lmao. The nazis were quite open about collaboration between different nations. Your “they hated x” is a bunch of dogs. There were soldiers of every background fighting for the nazis.

you had cossacks
DETAIL_PICTURE_731789_80547764.jpg

muslims
220px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1973-116-11%2C_Waffen-SS%2C_13._Gebirgs-Div._%22Handschar%22.jpg

Even indians
images

Is this joggin your noggin?
Just because you don’t like the fact that nazis were true socialists it doesn’t change the fact that they were.
Nothing you said in any way proved they were leftists or socialists. The cossacks were/are notoriously anti-semitic so I'm really not sure what that's supposed to mean. Nazis were far right. It's a historical consensus and this whole "nazis were left wing" was started by trolls and is perpetuated by trolls like you.
 
Huck Finn takes place in the 1800s and reflects upon that time period from a white perspective I agree. Certainly one should be able to find African American literature reflecting the same period that can act as a counter-point and cultural perspective of the time period. From a curriculum standpoint have a student read both then discuss the differences in how the authors approach those time periods and societal issues. Same for 19th century literature that someone finds problematic from a racial and or cultural perspective.
61nOuU9TqjL._SL500_.jpg
 
this is basically indirect banning without actually calling it banning. come on, man.

It's actually very technically and unarguably, not a banning. The books are still freely available for purchase for all the children or their parents.
 
This thread is a mess. Book banning is bad, but some things to remember for people who care about getting things right:

1. No books are banned. Anyone who wants to read the books can read the books. They're not being removed from libraries or book stores. They're just not being assigned in Burbank.
2. The Burbank school district doesn't speak for the entire left or even the entire Democratic Party.
3. A curriculum is necessary severely limited. Not every book can be included, and there are many potentially worthy candidates.

IMO, at least a couple of the books on that list are absolute classics that everyone should read (and, NB, they're coming from a liberal perspective, and a lot of the nutters screeching about this decision almost certainly haven't read and wouldn't like them). However, to decide whether they're *more* worthy of inclusion in the curriculum than other candidates requires more information than the story provides.
I don't think the problem is that they are removed from the curriculum so much as the apparent reason for that removal. They're not being removed because of a general need to prune or refresh the assigned reading but rather because of at least one instance of problematic behavior related to the reading and issues of racial perspective and or insensitivity brought up by a few families. Rather than having the difficult conversations about those periods and using these books as real learning opportunities about the perspectives of White and African American experiences during those times they are just cut out. That isn't learning, its just sweeping that potential conversation under the rug.
 
Banned or removed from teaching plan? Those are two different things. We read none of the above in school btw.

Make no mistake academics are trying to change the culture now that very few people are actually a part of their children's education. But those who teach their children put them at a huge advantage.

If you're a parent it is your responsibility to make sure your child is properly educated.
 
The democratic party is the new NSDAP.
Ban books. Check
Violent riots. Check
Media censorship. Check
Punish dissent with more violence. Check
Start a war somewhere. Pending
Literally none of this is unique to the dems only.
 
I don't think the problem is that they are removed from the curriculum so much as the apparent reason for that removal. They're not being removed because of a general need to prune or refresh the assigned reading but rather because of at least one instance of problematic behavior related to the reading and issues of racial perspective and or insensitivity brought up by a few families. Rather than having the difficult conversations about those periods and using these books as real learning opportunities about the perspectives of White and African American experiences during those times they are just cut out. That isn't learning, its just sweeping that potential conversation under the rug.

I think there can be a real discussion from this point, but when you have this hysterical reaction equating the decision with actual book banning or Nazi activity (!), it's impossible to have a rational discussion.

I think part of the underlying story here is that there are so many books that would be worthy of inclusion in the curriculum that aren't in it that it's very easy to just push anything out on the slightest objection. But like I said, we really don't know enough to evaluate the decision. How much thought was put into it, what was the thinking, what books are replacing the ones removed, etc.
 
Banned or removed from teaching plan? Those are two different things. We read none of the above in school btw.

Make no mistake academics are trying to change the culture now that very few people are actually a part of their children's education. But those who teach their children put them at a huge advantage.

If you're a parent it is your responsibility to make sure your child is properly educated.
Removed from the reading curriculum. As I mentioned already, the problem isn't so much the removal of a particular book but rather the reason for that removal. To simply sweep the problem those books apparently represent under the rug rather than using them as a unique learning opportunity to address those very problems is lazy on the part of educators and disservice to the students who should be challenged to look beyond their immediate perceptions of the material.

For instance, could Huck Finn have had the "adventure" he did if he had been black? No? Why? Learning about the society of that time period, how would the story have likely developed for Huck over the course of the narrative if he had been black. Has the ability to have that sort of "adventure" changed for young African Americans since that time? Yes? How? No? Why?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lsa
I think there can be a real discussion from this point, but when you have this hysterical reaction equating the decision with actual book banning or Nazi activity (!), it's impossible to have a rational discussion.

I think part of the underlying story here is that there are so many books that would be worthy of inclusion in the curriculum that aren't in it that it's very easy to just push anything out on the slightest objection. But like I said, we really don't know enough to evaluate the decision. How much thought was put into it, what was the thinking, what books are replacing the ones removed, etc.

I think the real interesting story is how these books are state mandated and thus artificially create demand for these old shitty books. Propping up these old shitty book companies for decades and making kids read old shitty books they don't even want to read.

It's like communism but for old shitty books.
 
Removed from the reading curriculum. As I mentioned already, the problem isn't so much the removal of a particular book but rather the reason for that removal. To simply sweep the problem those books apparently represent under the rug rather than using them as a unique learning opportunity to address those very problems is lazy on the part of educators and disservice to the students who should be challenged to look beyond their immediate perceptions of the material.

For instance, could Huck Finn have had the "adventure" he did if he had been black? No? Why? Learning about the society of that time period, how would the story have likely developed for Huck over the course of the narrative if he had been black. Has the ability to have that sort of "adventure" changed for young African Americans since that time? Yes? How? No? Why?

You know what else sounds lazy?

Making kids read the same shitty old books for nearly a century instead of changing or improving the curriculum despite its obvious failures.
 
The nazis were socialists. The S in NSDAP stands for socialist. The European Union was actually modelled after the European Confederation plan of Von Ribbentrop. As painful for you it is to admit, the nazis were leftists.

My god you are insane.
 
I think the real interesting story is how these books are state mandated and thus artificially create demand for these old shitty books. Propping up these old shitty book companies for decades and making kids read old shitty books they don't even want to read.

It's like communism but for old shitty books.

To Kill a Mockingbird and Huckleberry Finn are two of the greatest American novels, but I get the point that the curriculum should be at least open to change.
 
To Kill a Mockingbird and Huckleberry Finn are two of the greatest American novels, but I get the point that the curriculum should be at least open to change.

I'll even concede that they're not all shitty, but they're certainly old.

It would also probably be pretty cool for some other American authors in the past 100 years to get some spotlight. Especially for those authors and publishers at least.

At the rate we're going they might as well replace the reading portion of the curriculum with a viewing of Mad Max: Fury Road.
 
Back
Top