Having grown up in Asia, anti-Semitism seems like just the weirdest thing, because, like, all you white people are pretty much the same to me.*
* Mostly a joke, kind of but not really.
It’s funny but not in a ha-ha way to consider how racism always looks weird to people “outside” the deal. Like the Japanese diplomat who saved thousands of Jews during WWII, or the German Nazi party member who tried to save Chinese citizens in Nanking…
Because you know, your racism is invalid since you’re very clearly the same as the people you’re racist towards, but my racism makes total sense having nothing in common with whatever inferior race I’m racist towards…
Humans clearly needed a prolonged Beta, we went into production with very serious bugs.
This is all very, very true.
The youngest living Holocaust survivors are now in their 70s, and there are very few older survivors who have more vivid and revolting tales of the horrors around.
And so this current generation is the first to grow up without first generation survivors, or WWII veterans who saw those horrors, firsthand featured prominently in media they consume. And as a result, as Dave points out, horrifying bits of antisemitism creep into their popular lexicon when they speak among themselves, and it takes hold.
I can tell you on our platform at work, our three most asked questions are:
- Something something Harambe/Cincinnati Zoo/Zookeepers
- What is love?
- Hitler did nothing wrong?
I can tell you that as moderators, we kill that third question dead and instaban the asker. That it is as popular and prevalent as that even with those controls in place tells us a lot about how prevalent the idea of racism and antisemitism as a meme for the lulz is in the current generation. Good luck parents.
(Also, as a history nut, that third question offends me, because the list of things done wrong by Hitler would fill a thousand page book.)
Yes, but many asians are extremely racist too. Everybody hates the Japanese, for example.
I can tell you, as a parent, I have put no small thought into how I will approach this subject. He’s 3, and in probably about 5-7 years I am going to sit him down and we’re going to watch Schindlers List. There will be books, history, etc. We will also talk about the Japanese internment, the spectre of racism, and why those groups were targeted. Basically I am going to make a concerted effort to instill in him the gravity of the horrors, and do so early. Better do a few years too early than too late, I want to be the one setting the tone and seriousness, rather than let his peers instill these rancid ideas I have to correct.
I’m of an age where my grandfather was a Marine during WWII, and participated in some late Pacific action. I have a direct connection to these things. But my grandfather died 20 years ago. Now my oldest relatives were just barely born at the time, with the only one who was a service member being from Korea era.
And, like you, from one history lover to another, question 3 deserves exactly that kind of swift and uncompromising response. If we had the ability to punch people in the face through the internet, I’d do so for those little shits.
The idea that we have to rely on good parents to teach history in a way that reminds young people of what happened and how awful some of these events are horrifies me… there are too many parents who just don’t care. Our schools need to do this too. They just do.
Can I recommend the My Teacher is an Alien series by Bruce Coville to various parents in the thread?
Sure, the basic lessons of friendship, otherness, and bravery are nice, but as the series progresses, it winds up being hella dark, with aliens threatening to wipe humanity out to spare the universe our insanity, citing our many atrocities through the ages, and the hero-kids have to prove to the aliens that we’re worth saving, despite even ongoing tragedies in (IIRC) Kosovo, for instance. It’s pretty bleak stuff, but it sure as shit made ~7-8-year-old Armando think twice about the intrinsic good of mankind, and in a form more palatable to my brain at that age.
I agree. But good parents don’t rely on others to make sure the important things are done right.
But I can assure you I am going to take a particular interest in the curriculum of the schools. And I will have no compunction about being that parent if I find them lacking, particularly in these areas.
Never heard of it, but I’ve got a book list a mile long for my son already ;) Some are for pure entertainment, others for impactfulness.
We need a thread for childrens’ books-- I’m constantly looking for stuff to get for my nephews.
The first book is an all-time classic (and Bruce Coville is my favorite children’s/teen author by a wide margin–PLEASE check out his work as you continue working on your list!). Book 4 takes it to some dark fucking places:
I think one of the weirder examples of the arbitrariness of racism is the Nazis on the one hand declaring slavs subhuman, and on the other hand calling their Japanese allies “honorary Aryans.”
Man I know! I have no idea what new (read: last 20 years) is the best stuff for kids. I lucked out when @rowe33 tipped me on to Julia Donaldson (The Gruffalo) which became my 3 year old’s favorite. Better than Dr Seuss for him.
So aside from my dog eared copies of Asimov, Enders Game, various abridged classics, and other favorites from my youth on my shelf, I’m not sure what to start passing along once he gets old enough for proper books. So rest assured I’ll be pumping the community for thoughts in the years to come!
Part of the problem for me @ArmandoPenblade is that I went very quickly into the deep end. I basically jumped straight from early readers, to abridged classics like this:
(my grandparents got me a set of around 40 of these in like 2nd grade. I’d read them in a weekend)
and by the time I was in 4th grade I was reading unabridged Jack London and Sherlock Holmes. So, suffice to say, I was not a normal child :P
Depending on his age, maybe Brad Meltzer’s Ordinary People Change the World books. They’re pretty awesome. The first set includes Abraham Lincoln, Amelia Earhart, Rosa Parks, and Albert Einstein. It says for ages 5-8. Just got it for my 5yo.
I’m glad there are parents still involved. I mean I sort of know it based on how many textbooks keep getting pulled for calling slaves workers, saying the plantation owners treated them like family and etc., but I just assume parents who do that are rare. After all, the book was published by adults with language like that. And if they’re willing to soften history like that, who knows what they will do with WWII and Vietnam and all the other historical events we’re supposed to learn about in public school.
They probably are. Because in order to do those things requires a parent a) knowledgeable enough to know better b) aware of what the textbook says c) engaged enough to be able to talk to the school d) with the time to do it e) and have it important enough to them to actually do it.
Which is why I will, because most others wont. Granted being in the Chicago area means I probably won’t see those most offensive cases (the slavery one in particular is a southern thing, though Texas seems to be hell bent on exporting). However things like this antisemitic ‘joking’ I will be keeping a particular eye for. Because there will be a reckoning if he thinks those jokes will be ok. One that will be taken up the line to his friends and his friends parents. I hope it never happens though.
Then you got the homeschoolers, who are feeding propaganda to their kids in many cases.
Oh yeah, for sure. I was just speaking of anti-Semitism specifically. The really funny thing is they way that the racism “tiers” shake out differently in different cultural/ethnic backgrounds.
Although, in my grandfather’s case it was less a blanket “I hate the Japanese because of their race”, and more “the Japanese army literally tried to murder me and everybody I’ve ever known, so there’s some hard feelings still, maybe.”
None of this is remotely true legally.
You yell fire in a crowded theater, cause a panic, people get trampled and die. You cannot be charged with reckless endangerment as you are protected by free speech. You walk away. Is that correct?
[quote]With that ruling, the Court overturned the Schenck decision that had introduced “shouting fire in a crowded theater.” No longer was “clear and present danger” a sufficient standard for criminalizing speech. To break the law, speech now had to incite “imminent lawless action.”
So if a court can prove that you incite imminent lawlessness by falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater, it can convict you. If you incite an unlawful riot, your speech is “brigaded” with illegal action, and you will have broken the law. But merely falsely shouting “fire” does not break the law, even if it risks others’ safety.
[/quote]