"Survey finds lack of holocaust knowledge in american young"

[Necroghastia]

Am American and didn't learn about the Holocaust in school. Can confirm.

Ok they actually did teach it, but I may be apart of one of the last generations that did.

????????

[Torisakia]

How is the Holocaust not covered alongside World War II? Or do Americans not even learn about that? Personally, I think all the major genocides of the 20th century: the Holocaust, Holodomor, and the Great Leap Backwards should be taught in school to teach students that totalitarianism is never a good idea.

We learn that Germany and Japan were bad and America was great. That's all we get from World War II. At least that's what I got. Did I mention I didn't attend a very good school district?

[Torisakia]

Am American and didn't learn about the Holocaust in school. Can confirm.

Ok they actually did teach it, but I may be apart of one of the last generations that did.

????????

I was being facetious.

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

Why don't we do a survey of American youth and see how many know about the Bosnian genocide that happened only 16 years ago. Of course, unlike the holocaust no one seems to care about that or any other genocide.

Because Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks massacring each other has all to do in the world with one of the most horrific genocides of the 20th century.

Let's just walk away with some American youth don't know about Genocide.

Americans don't know nothing.

Careful with that generalization. Don't get the impression that Americans are "stupid" just because a few people didn't pay attention in history class.

[Kathol Rift]

Why don't we do a survey of American youth and see how many know about the Bosnian genocide that happened only 16 years ago. Of course, unlike the holocaust no one seems to care about that or any other genocide.

Because Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks massacring each other has all to do in the world with one of the most horrific genocides of the 20th century.

Americans don't know nothing.

Careful with that generalization. Don't get the impression that Americans are "stupid" just because a few people didn't pay attention in history class.

I’d put a little more blame on the history class itself than just the people. Our school system is honestly fucked. I don’t think we’ve spent more than a week total learning about the Holocaust across my 3.25 years of high school so far.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Maybe the answer is sending them off to holocaust summer camp.

[Novus America]

Because his long term security is at stake.
They absolutely will, as they are, using their economic power to destroy our jobs and undermine our political freedoms as we speak.

The short term gains are not worth the long term harms.

When you benefit from the existence of a moral principle, upholding the moral principle is actually the pragmatic thing to do.

A regime that does not respect its own people, will treat you even worse when they have the opportunity. So you avoid giving them that opportunity. It is less about stopping the existing tragedy, then it is another letting them do it more and more places. Giving a regime hostile to you and what you support, money and power for a short term gain, is not pragmatic.

Fighting the Nazis did not stop the Holocaust from happening, but it made the world a safer place for us long term. Because their ideology and attempts to keep spreading it was a threat to our way of life, and what we thought good.

Again it is not actually pragmatic to be a self serving sociopath only interest in the short term.
Long term it will cost you far more than you gained in the short term.

But then the issue isn't about the moral principle of human rights. It's about political and economic independence, and accountability of those with an abundance of organisational power to those who live under and ideally benefit from the political system they hold up, so that they don't sell out the people who depend on them for the sake of cutting costs. A regime that lacks respect for defenceless groups it has coercive power over won't have the same lack of respect for people who are reliably protected by something substantial other than itself - so if you want to be protected from them, the guarantee of your security is what's at stake, and yours alone, not the security of inconsequential and defenceless people with no means to secure their own collective "rights". You don't benefit from the moral principle universally existing, you benefit from it being granted to you by a power structure that protects those within it.

A government will not protect a principle if that principle no longer exists though. If a government is dominated by a foreign regime that rejects the principle, why and how will it protect it for its own own people?
The thing is in a globalized world, it works both ways.

Sure, I agree you could take the approach of containment over rollback (we could have contained the Nazis too, although we did not) but the point is we are doing neither. We are not making any attempt to protect the principle here OR there.

And if you want respect, hypocrisy makes you look bad. And looking bad is not pragmatic.
This is why being a sociopathic dick ignoring the suffering of others is not pragmatic. Because if you will not help anyone else, nobody will help you. And this matters when you need outside help, which you will. If you will not care when you they suffer, they are less likely to care if you suffer. And you may need them to care, you may need their help.

Yes it is true you get the benefit of the moral principle existing for you, but in a globalized world, if you give up domestic and foreign power to a global power that rejects that principle, you lose the ability to protect that principle, anywhere.
If you are a weak hypocrite, with a weak and hypocritical government, who will stand up for you? No one.

Sure you can take the isolationist approach, but you cannot have global outsourcing and be an isolationist.

If you want to be isolationist you have to be self sufficient. If you want to be dependent on others, you are forced to care about what they believe.

If you want to be dependent on others, while ignoring the suffering of others, you are in a bad spot.

If you are in a globalized world, global belief in principles impacts you.

The problem is we want to BOTH. To be dependent on others, yet not really care about the suffering of others.
Surely you agree you cannot have both.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I think it's taught badly. Anywhere I know of, teachers and textbooks impart an emotional bias of "this is a horrible thing I have to teach, but I will be unusually solemn and respectful and I expect all of you to be too".

Really none of history should be taught that way. It's not the teacher's place to model how students should feel about the content, and I'm quite sure it has the opposite effect on some students. "ha ha Whore King Hawkins is really sad about some Jews dying like a century ago, imma gonna troll with that when I get home"

But I'm not a teacher. Katganistan what do you think?

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

Because Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks massacring each other has all to do in the world with one of the most horrific genocides of the 20th century.

Careful with that generalization. Don't get the impression that Americans are "stupid" just because a few people didn't pay attention in history class.

I’d put a little more blame on the history class itself than just the people. Our school system is honestly fucked. I don’t think we’ve spent more than a week total learning about the Holocaust across my 3.25 years of high school so far.

Yeah, I understand that our school system is messed up. Still, it'd be unfair to dismiss Americans as "stupid" regardless.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Maybe the answer is sending them off to holocaust summer camp.

Get the fat off your kid!

Due to varying yield and delivery distance, packaged fat my incur extra charges.

[Saiwania]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unpatriotic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

[Nimzonia]

Why do people keep acting shocked and outraged when 25% of the population doesn't know something or other? 25% of people are absolutely dumb as fuck and know nothing whatsoever, and that doesn't change whatever country you go to. We're talking about the sub-90 end of the IQ bell curve here. Forget teaching them history, education has done its job if they're even able to function in society without ending up in debt or hospital or jail.

[Andsed]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an 1. exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still 2. predominately unpatriotic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

1. Not really. If anything I would say the Holocaust has been downplayed some by so much of the focus going on the 6 million Jewish victims and the millions of others non Jewish victims getting a little overlooked.

2. Who the fuck cares if it is unpatriotic? Learning history should not be about promoting patriotism. Teaching about slavery and the struggles of disadvantaged group is important to lean.

[Dakran]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unLa-li-lu-le-loic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

The Holocaust and the history of slavery are absolutely pertinent to learn about in school, because it helps paint he picture of how a country got to the point that is, why it go there, and can serve as a warning for future generations. It's an insult to those who suffered to just drop history because someone believes "well it happened a long time ago, why should we bother talking about it now?" I'm not even going to bother arguing that claim that it's an exaggerated story because if you truly cared enough to find out, there's plenty of perspectives from actual holocaust survivors to inform you of the truth.

And basing history solely off of patriotism is also a terrible idea, because that's how you blind yourself to the nations failings and don't learn any lessons about the mistakes our forefathers made.

[Novus America]

Why do people keep acting shocked and outraged when 25% of the population doesn't know something or other? 25% of people are absolutely dumb as fuck and know nothing whatsoever, and that doesn't change whatever country you go to. We're talking about the sub-90 end of the IQ bell curve here. Forget teaching them history, education has done its job if they're even able to function in society without ending up in debt or hospital or jail.

Given the huge number we have who got into debt over stupid things like gambling, in hospitals for stupid things like excessive drinking, and in jail, we are failing at that though.

[Nuroblav]

1. Not really. If anything I would say the Holocaust has been downplayed some by so much of the focus going on the 6 million Jewish victims and the millions of others non Jewish victims getting a little overlooked.

2. Who the fuck cares if it is unpatriotic? Learning history should not be about promoting patriotism. Teaching about slavery and the struggles of disadvantaged group is important to lean.

I see using subjects to promote patriotism as being rather counterproductive, choosing to sacrifice knowledge for that sweet sweet love of country (which often just becomes love for government). But given Sai's views, I can't say I'm surprised. Even so, if it's at the point where acknowledgement of suffering is sacrificed for political gain, it's worth taking a step back and wondering if it's going a bit too far.

[Necroghastia]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era.

how the fuck are you supposed to teach anything about WW2 without getting into one of the prime reasons for everything the Nazis did?

It is long overdue that we get past it.

it hasn't even been 100 years my guy are you suggesting that we just.... stop teaching anything beyond a couple decades prior to %%CURRENT YEAR%%? Because that's a waste of everyone's time.

Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, as the saying goes, and we're seeing a lot of repetition lately.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media.

Reason for that impression?

The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient.

Because all Jewish people live in Israel, lmao
Also, "sufficient" for what?

Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today teach about why that's bad and about the horrible things that racism causes because I don't want to be called out for saying Hitler did nothing wrong except lose

ftfy

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unpatriotic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US.

Predictable and typical incoherent rambling from white supremacist is predictable and typical incoherent rambling

Now that is real history.

Like, what the fuck does this even mean? People other than the founding fathers existed and were important. That is indisputable. Well, indisputable if you only want to make honest attempts at disputes, and not racist ramblings.

Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background,

The background?! The background?! That's dishonest even for you and you damn well know it.

but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

So we don't end up with people like you who think there's nothing wrong with white supremacy. Fucking obviously.

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unpatriotic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

History isn't... supposed to be patriotic? America isn't always the good guy my man.

Also the Holocaust happened. Deal with it. Actually, we only focus on the Jewish victims when there were millions more unsung, not to mention how the Japanese did war crimes similar in scale to the Holocaust except it's not taught.

[Novus America]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unLa-li-lu-le-loic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

The Holocaust and the history of slavery are absolutely pertinent to learn about in school, because it helps paint he picture of how a country got to the point that is, why it go there, and can serve as a warning for future generations. It's an insult to those who suffered to just drop history because someone believes "well it happened a long time ago, why should we bother talking about it now?" I'm not even going to bother arguing that claim that it's an exaggerated story because if you truly cared enough to find out, there's plenty of perspectives from actual holocaust survivors to inform you of the truth.

And basing history solely off of patriotism is also a terrible idea, because that's how you blind yourself to the nations failings and don't learn any lessons about the mistakes our forefathers made.

Anyways even if we want to be patriotic, (which we can be while acknowledging our flaws), explaining the horrors hundreds of thousands of Americans died to help stop, makes sense.

But that final part is the key. Although I do not think the Nazis will magically reappear (they will not) I acknowledge that if you ignore the suffering of others, who will care when you are the one to suffer?
Even disregarding the morality (which I do not) it is still logical. If you ignore the suffering of others, when it comes your turn to suffer, nobody will stand up for you.

[Khoronzon]

I don't remember ever looking at the Bosnian genocide in school, although I knew that some shit went on there (atlases are interesting). We did learn about the Rwandan one though.

Same here - most of the more "obscure" genocides like Armenia and Bosnia were only mentioned in passing, but Rwanda did get more coverage. Probably because the Canadian school system wanted to show off Canadian hero Romeo Dallaire's valiant but hopeless struggle to end the genocide in the face of American and UN inaction, or something to that nature.

As a side note, I've been through several school systems growing up, the most notable of which were French in grade school, and Canadian from late grade school to university, and both taught fairly extensively about the Holocaust. It honestly feels weird knowing that it wouldn't be comprehensively covered in a lot of American schools, given how big it was in my historical education - I've read both Night and Dawn by Elie Wiesel in class, watched Life is Beautiful and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, had a Holocaust survivor come visit, the works. Taking that out would leave a pretty large hole, and while I do believe that hole could theoretically be filled up in a productive way, given what I so often hear about historical awareness in America, I'm pretty skeptical of how that gets done in this case.

A government will not protect a principle if that principle no longer exists though. If a government is dominated by a foreign regime that rejects the principle, why and how will it protect it for its own own people?

Yes it is true you get the benefit of the moral principle existing for you, but in a globalized world, if you give up domestic and foreign power to a global power that rejects that principle, you lose the ability to protect that principle, anywhere.

Which is exactly why I stated what I believe the issue is about - securing political and economic independence from rival encroachment, and accountability of power to the political community that ideally should benefit from it, as opposed to some abstract notion of upholding human rights just because people "don't deserve" to suffer. This admittedly may well result in similar things to punishing China for its human rights record in practice - ousting Chinese influence from American life - but the rationale would be radically different, as would the resulting propaganda for it distributed to the American masses, and the public mentality it would cultivate.

And if you want respect, hypocrisy makes you look bad. And looking bad is not pragmatic.

It's hardly hypocrisy, my morality is very consistent. I believe in self-interest. That's it.

This is why being a sociopathic dick ignoring the suffering of others is not pragmatic. Because if you will not help anyone else, nobody will help you. And this matters when you need outside help, which you will. If you will not care when you they suffer, they are less likely to care if you suffer. And you may need them to care, you may need their help.

If you want to be dependent on others, while ignoring the suffering of others, you are in a bad spot.

If you are in a globalized world, global belief in principles impacts you.

The problem is we want to BOTH. To be dependent on others, yet not really care about the suffering of others.
Surely you agree you cannot have both.

I never said that helping others is never in your own interest. I was referring to helping anyone who is suffering, just because they're suffering. Let's say China backs off on the Uighurs, Tibetans, and whoever else. What then? Do they build independent, prosperous states through which they can provide substantial support to those who aided them, or do they remain beholden to China while gaining maybe a sliver of bargaining power towards the Han majority? Regardless of whether they get helped or not, they won't be of much use on an international scale unless they get massively and aggressively propped up by foreign powers, and even then it would be more trouble than it's worth. Whether they live or die off is historically inconsequential. Aiding those capable of substantial reciprocation is where the benefit of helping others comes from - if they aren't feasibly capable of that, it's just a waste of resources and good will.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media.

Reason for that impression?

Saiwania is NSG’s resident neo-Nazi, do the math.

[Novus America]

I learned about the Holocaust in K-12 and we don't need to continue that curriculum any longer, except for perhaps if the students are in AP or higher level history that is WW2 era. It is long overdue that we get past it. Stuff that is more relevant to today's times should be in.

My impression is that this is possibly an exxagerated story by some Jewish owned or influenced media. The US backs Israel and does its share of helping ensure that they have the armaments they need. That should be sufficient. Just because there is plenty of antisemitism still around, doesn't mean we need to make Semites of any sort, keep being the center of attention in discussions of how bad their history supposedly was through the ages until today.

This 1619 Project is another example of curriculum I don't like. I know its about slavery but its still predominately unpatriotic and negative because the emphasis is placed on those who didn't benefit under the US from its creation onwards instead of on the people who were actually in control back then, such as the Founding Fathers of the US and the European colonists. Now that is real history. Slavery and oppression may've happened in the background, but why the need or desire to make that the main story other than if the objective really is to advance Liberalism?

History isn't... supposed to be patriotic? America isn't always the good guy my man.

Also the Holocaust happened. Deal with it. Actually, we only focus on the Jewish victims when there were millions more unsung, not to mention how the Japanese did war crimes similar in scale to the Holocaust except it's not taught.

I agree, History should be willing to be critical. History that is just about advancing an agenda is not history at all.
Although I think one can be patriotic AND acknowledge the past flaws, failures and crimes of your country.

But besides, in regards to the Holocaust, the US did not commit it, we helped stop it. So how is teaching the Holocaust contrary to US Patriotism anyways?

If anything fighting the Nazis is something we can be proud of (without being proud of our mistakes while doing so, or waiting so long to help fleeing Jews and all).

[Major-Tom]

Reason for that impression?

Saiwania is NSG’s resident neo-Nazi, do the math.

I don't quite understand how people can hold onto those ludicrous impressions despite overwhelming, and really, quite sobering and depressing evidence to the contrary. It's one thing to have an edgy alt-right phase when you're 15, because subconsciously you're angry that you still haven't had your first girlfriend, it's a whole 'other beast to hold onto those views for many, many, many years into adulthood.

[Bienenhalde]

Which is exactly why I stated what I believe the issue is about - securing political and economic independence from rival encroachment, and accountability of power to the political community that ideally should benefit from it, as opposed to some abstract notion of upholding human rights just because people "don't deserve" to suffer. This admittedly may well result in similar things to punishing China for its human rights record in practice - ousting Chinese influence from American life - but the rationale would be radically different, as would the resulting propaganda for it distributed to the American masses, and the public mentality it would cultivate.

To be fair, I suppose many Americans are pretty callous and insensitive towards the suffering of foreigners and / or non-white people: how else can you explain the fact that Trump won the presidency? Nevertheless, I would like to hope that there is more good in humanity, and besides, I don't exactly want a situation where xenophobic and racist attitudes towards Chinese or East Asian people in general would be encouraged.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Why do people keep acting shocked and outraged when 25% of the population doesn't know something or other? 25% of people are absolutely dumb as fuck and know nothing whatsoever, and that doesn't change whatever country you go to. We're talking about the sub-90 end of the IQ bell curve here.

That offends me.

Forget teaching them history, education has done its job if they're even able to function in society without ending up in debt or hospital or jail.

As an under-performing genius who has been in a (mental) hospital twice and probably should have gone to jail, I think you're putting way too much reliance on 'smarts' and discounting other factors in personhood.

I think the urge to be good at something, when it attaches to school work, is far more important than a measure of how well they did in a problem-solving test. High intelligence gives a person the ability to learn a lot quickly ... but that doesn't mean they do.