By now, you’re probably familiar with the grassroots Republican mission to ban the teaching of critical race theory in K-12 education even though critical race theory is not taught in K-12 education – and that “CRT” is now a bogeyman term for any and all curricula that attempts to acquaint white kids with the factually racist injustices that stain American history. Basically, the right-wing mantra is that there are always two sides to every story.
This has prompted some anti-CRT zealots to stake out some fascinating positions. Case in point: an Indiana state senator named Scott Baldwin. He has introduced a sweeping state bill (due to be voted on soon) that requires all public school teachers to “remain impartial in teaching curricular materials or conducting educational activities.”
During a hearing the other day, Baldwin was queried as to whether such a requirement should possibly apply to the teaching of Nazism, which (permit me to check my notes) triggered the Holocaust and a world war that killed an estimated 50 million people. But Baldwin was steadfast in response. This man has principles, after all. He said: “I believe that we’ve gone too far when we take a position on those isms…We need to be impartial…I’m not sure it’s right for us to determine how that child should think and that’s where I’m trying to provide the guardrails.”
And just to make sure that teachers stay “impartial” about issues like Nazism, Baldwin’s bill requires that teachers pledge their impartiality by posting all their “classroom curricula online for parents – including lesson plans, worksheets, presentations and other materials.” That way, parents can file formal complaints if impartiality is breached.
Hey, no problem. I can think of five ways that an impartial lesson plan on Nazism can ally all parental fears about bias against Nazism. As I said, there are two sides to every story. For instance:
Hitler presided over a rapid economic recovery and gave Germans jobs.
Hitler built the Autobahn and Germans drove on the splendid highways with the car he inspired, the Volkswagen.
Hitler abhorred cigarettes and was an early pioneer of no-smoking laws.
Hitler killed tens of millions of people, but there were many hundreds of millions that he didn’t kill.
Hitler loved dogs, like we all do.
Presto! If there’s one thing our kids sorely need, it’s a little balance, right? What could possibly be wrong with teaching “on the one hand, on the other hand”?
Alas, there was a spoilsport at the Indiana hearing, history teacher Matt Bockenfeld. Here’s what he had to say: “It’s the second semester of U.S. history, so we’re learning about the rise of fascism and the rise of Nazism right now. And I’m just not neutral on the political ideology of fascism. We condemn it, and we condemn it in full, and I tell my students the purpose, in a democracy, of understanding the traits of fascism is so that we can recognize it and we can combat it…We’re not neutral on Nazism. We take a stand in the classroom against it, and it matters that we do.” He also said that he would “oppose Nazism until they fire me.”
Baldwin, the state senator, later tried to amend his position, telling local reporters that he’s no fan of extremism either (even though it recently surfaced that in 2010 he donated some money to the extremist Oath Keepers.) Whatever. And it’s not as if this behavior is limited to Indiana. In Texas, a new Republican-enacted law requires educators to present multiple perspectives when discussing “widely debated and currently controversial” issues. For instance, said one curriculum director in a North Texas school district, “make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust that you have one that has an opposing, that has other perspectives.”
But come on, let’s be balanced here. Yes, those right-wingers in Indiana and Texas have staked out problematical positions, but surely they’ve been trumped by the anti-vax activist who now says that the best cure for Covid is to drink one’s own urine: “God’s given us everything we need.”
Try to be impartial about that one.