|
My issue is more this: OK, he may have broke school board policy. Was this the first time?
If the board felt so strongly that he was out of line they should have addressed the issue of balance. Suspending him is the equivalent of sticking their heads in the sand. Have him reassess his lesson and make a lesson of the whole incident. Why did this reaction occur compared to that reaction? Why do some feel it was supporting the "liberal" stance vs. a "conservative" stance. What are the bias at play in any discussion. How does the media effect the public discourse. Hopefully you can see where this is going...
Instead of just trying to "hush it up" address it head on. We want classrooms full of critical thinkers. Students that can look at all the many colours of the political spectrum and appreciate it like the colour wheel (able to mix colours to make new ones) --- have I stretched this analogy too far?
Having listened to what he said, it wasn't that far off. Bush, and many other politicians have used the kind of rhetoric and PR manipulation that Hitler and his cronies used to win and hold power in Wiemar Germany.
He clearly made the point that he was not saying Hitler=Bush. That would be a facile comparison by any stretch. He also makes some valid criticisms of capitolism and democracy. Pure capitolism is heartless. Democratic nations can and are violent.
His only fault was in the assumption of the counter argument or context. Capitolism is not so heartless when tempered with laws, regulation and a good dose of democracy. Democaratic nations can also be quite peaceful.
It was a poorly taught lesson at worst. No need to suspend.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
|