Should Marx and Engels be required reading in high school?

[Edlichbury]

I see no reason why the foundations of our society shouldn't be taught. History, however it is expressed, is crucial to society.

[Newzie]

What, because indoctrinating them into theist ''capitalism'' is better?

In my beliefs, yes. But should we? No.

They already are by living within capitalism. I don't see why they shouldn't get an alternative viewpoint in it, especially since that alternate viewpoint is so misunderstood amongst the general public.

[The Parkus Empire]

What quality has Mein Kampf to commend itself to a reader? It does not make supported argument, it does no encourage critical thinking, the work is poorly written and organized--what's more, it's very Germanic-centric, it is irrelevant to anyone of another heritage.

Well of you could suggest a book of similar content and better structure I'd be glad to substitute it.

I don't see the importance of extensively teaching that content. It is based on delusions of grandeur and paranoia, not logic or reason, not even faulty logic or reason. Understanding the idea of racial supremacy historically is fine, but I don't think it needs to be taught in depth since there isn't any depth.

Now if you want to discuss or examine nationalism, again I propose Machiavelli's Discourses as very worthwhile work on the matter.

[The Ferret Revolution]

I never support forcing someone to do anything but I do think that this would be a great idea. It would greatly reduce the ignorance that communism and socialism get in America. And I'm not agreeing with it because I want everyone to turn into socialists but instead I feel like everyone should be exposed to multiple viewpoints.

[Old Memories]

Why not ?

I enjoyed reading Marx and you could also let people read about A.Smith or Hitler to improve critical thinking .

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

They already are by living within capitalism. I don't see why they shouldn't get an alternative viewpoint in it, especially since that alternate viewpoint is so misunderstood amongst the general public.

And how many people truely understand Capitalism? Very few, as many [students] seem to believe that Capitalism is Fascism.

[Sedikal]

Well of you could suggest a book of similar content and better structure I'd be glad to substitute it.

I don't see the importance of extensively teaching that content. It is based on delusions of grandeur and paranoia, not logic or reason, not even faulty logic or reason. Understanding the idea of racial supremacy historically is fine, but I don't think it needs to be taught in depth since there isn't any depth.

Now if you want to discuss or examine nationalism, again I propose Machiavelli's Discourses as very worthwhile work on the matter.

The palingenetic core of generic fascist ideology might work a little bit better of maybe Nature of Fascism.

[Newzie]

They already are by living within capitalism. I don't see why they shouldn't get an alternative viewpoint in it, especially since that alternate viewpoint is so misunderstood amongst the general public.

And how many people truely understand Capitalism? Very few, as many [students] seem to believe that Capitalism is Fascism.

Which is why I said capitalist literary works should also be required reading if Marx is.


But there is an undeniable tendency to support capitalism and oppose communism within society, even though, as even you said, most people don't fully understand them.

[Kirav]

In principle, yes.

Let me state first-off that I'm not a communist or even a leftist. I disagree strongly with Marx's and Engels' political aims (I do, however, employ their methods of analysis in my own work). However, I recognise their contribution to the modern understanding of history, sociology/anthropology, and political development, and even aesthetics as too significant to be ignored (albeït imperfect and incomplete). I think that high school curricula should introduce students to as many of the important texts of the Western canon (probably as excerpts or, more optimistically, in abridged form) as possible.

However, in practice, I don't think making Marx and Engels required reading in high schools (by which I mean all or most public high schools - if an individual school can handle it as mine did, good for them) is possible or even desirable. Not only would it be politically difficult given the strong anticommunist sentiment among the American Right, but it would also be very difficult to come up with a state-level curricular guide for teaching Marx and Engels in a neutral, apolitical way. As we know from the constant debates over which flavour of American historiography should be taught in schools, inclusion or exclusion of just about anything into a school curriculum is (unfortunately) a political act, especially when the subject matter is relevant to politics.

[The Ferret Revolution]

Why can't their just be a politics class that teaches every viewpoint?

[Kirav]

Why can't their just be a politics class that teaches every viewpoint?

Because school curricula are set by politicians. Politicians are pretty much incapable of being objective and all-inclusive when it comes to politics.

[The Parkus Empire]

I don't see the importance of extensively teaching that content. It is based on delusions of grandeur and paranoia, not logic or reason, not even faulty logic or reason. Understanding the idea of racial supremacy historically is fine, but I don't think it needs to be taught in depth since there isn't any depth.

Now if you want to discuss or examine nationalism, again I propose Machiavelli's Discourses as very worthwhile work on the matter.

The palingenetic core of generic fascist ideology might work a little bit better of maybe Nature of Fascism.

Mein Kampf is assuredly not the core of fascism, it is the core of bitter, populist scapegoating.

[Eien No Nihon Teikoku]

It should, but only in the context of a larger discussion of political ideas. Others, such as Friedman, Locke, etc.

[Sedikal]

The palingenetic core of generic fascist ideology might work a little bit better of maybe Nature of Fascism.

Mein Kampf is assuredly not the core of fascism, it is the core of bitter, populist scapegoating.

But it still at least gives a view into the ideas of the creator of WWII which is something you should know when your studying WWII.

[Warda]

Um, in most HS English classes we don't even read the books at home. We only read them in class. So... I'm pretty sure that would take all of a decade to read.

[Patriqvinia]

No, there should be no required reading.

[The Parkus Empire]

Mein Kampf is assuredly not the core of fascism, it is the core of bitter, populist scapegoating.

But it still at least gives a view into the ideas of the creator of WWII which is something you should know when your studying WWII.

An study of legitimate German grievances would be better, along with racial supremacy and scapegoating and their history, and why they were effective at the time. An excerpt or two from Mein Kapmf at the most, but the purpose would be far better served with speech extracts and propaganda films.

[Geilinor]

Um, in most HS English classes we don't even read the books at home. We only read them in class.

Where did you get that idea?

[Warda]

Um, in most HS English classes we don't even read the books at home. We only read them in class.

Where did you get that idea?

From being in HS?

[Castille de Italia]

If it should be required, than Mein Kampf, the Bible, Ted, White and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto must also be required.

[Libertarian California]

No. Making books advocating for any ideology required reading is wrong.

[4years]

No. Making books advocating for any ideology required reading is wrong.

That would require trimming the curriculum quite a bit and not making the textbooks required reading. Further, students learn better when reading the actual words of historical figures rather than reading about said figures in textbooks.

[4years]

If it should be required, than 1. Mein Kampf, 2. the Bible, 3. Ted, White and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto must also be required.

1. An excerpt or two along with some of Hitler's other writings and speeches should be required when studying WW2 certainly.
2. If the topic in question is world religions or the dark ages, sure.
3. NO!

[The Parkus Empire]

No. Making books advocating for any ideology required reading is wrong.

HURRR DURRR kids shouldn't be encouraged to think for themselves, they should just be familiar with the ideology of their parents or else it's brainwashing.

[The Parkus Empire]

If it should be required, than 1. Mein Kampf, 2. the Bible, 3. Ted, White and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto must also be required.

1. An excerpt or two along with some of Hitler's other writings and speeches should be required when studying WW2 certainly.
2. If the topic in question is world religions or the dark ages, sure.
3. NO!

The Bible is pretty damn important for understanding some major Western literature and philosophy.