Should Nazi teachers be fired?

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Teacher is allegedly identarian, what Underseer would call a "free speech advocate." She lied about it and spread ideology in the classroom. Is it okay to fire her?

 

[Patooka]

Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes, why are we even discussing this?

 

[Bronzeage]

This story doesn't pass the sniff test. A 25 year old neo-nazi woman, who teaches social studies to 8th graders.

If we can take everything in the article as true, this teacher has already put her job in jeopardy when:

Volitich boasted about bringing her white nationalist beliefs into the classroom and hiding her ideology from administrators. She said that when parents complained to the school’s principal about how she is injecting political bias into the classroom, Volitich lied to the principal and said it was not true.

“She believed me and backed off,” she said.

If the common pattern emerges, what's really happening is a middle aged man is pretending to be a middle school teacher.

Of course, I have difficulty believing middle school teachers want to have sex with 14 year old boys, but it happens often enough.

 

[RavenSky]

This specific teacher should be fired given her admissions

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This specific teacher should be fired given her admissions

But isn't that how Nazis operate, to do their thing in secret-whether it's brainwashing or violence--until they are in charge?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Is she an actual nazi or just a white supremacist? Either way she shouldn't be teaching, but if the former she is also a threat of violence.

 

[whollygoats]

If the pictured woman is the said teacher, I think it might be instructive to have the district underwrite her personal submission to something like 23 & Me, with the proviso that she must explain the results to all of her classes.

 

[Politesse]

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Teacher is allegedly identarian, what Underseer would call a "free speech advocate." She lied about it and spread ideology in the classroom. Is it okay to fire her?

I don't think the title of the thread adequately reflects the issue it references. I think it would be wrong to fire someone for purely ideological reasons, regardless of what they were. But public educators are not permitted to use the classroom for broadcasting propaganda and willful misrepresentation of facts, as she has confessed to doing. Especially if the result is an oppressive or prejudicial environment for minority students, that is more than enough reason to terminate her position. She almost certainly signed a work contract forbidding her to do things like this, for one. Her actions, not her private beliefs, justify administrative action.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Teacher is allegedly identarian, what Underseer would call a "free speech advocate." She lied about it and spread ideology in the classroom. Is it okay to fire her?

I don't think the title of the thread adequately reflects the issue it references. I think it would be wrong to fire someone for purely ideological reasons, regardless of what they were. But public educators are not permitted to use the classroom for broadcasting propaganda and willful misrepresentation of facts, as she has confessed to doing. Especially if the result is an oppressive or prejudicial environment for minority students, that is more than enough reason to terminate her position. She almost certainly signed a work contract forbidding her to do things like this, for one. Her actions, not her private beliefs, justify administrative action.

Your argument follows from a premise that Nazism is "purely ideological." What if, just for example, your pure ideology is to grade different races differently and treat them differently and that means you cannot abide by publicly enforced laws at public schools?

Taking this a bit more generally, is Nazism a practice or a belief? Don't forget my last post in the thread. I pose the question (somewhat rhetorically):

But isn't that how Nazis operate, to do their thing in secret-whether it's brainwashing or violence--until they are in charge?

Isn't there something special about Nazism where they hide their true intentions and activism in the background? But even if we stick to thought crimes, I asked in another thread, would you hire a pedophile to work in a daycare. Do pedophiles also hide their actions?

 

[RavenSky]

This specific teacher should be fired given her admissions

But isn't that how Nazis operate, to do their thing in secret-whether it's brainwashing or violence--until they are in charge?

If she was truly a secret Nazi, then she would not be spreading her Nazi propaganda in her classroom.

In other words, fire her for her actual actions, not her secret thoughts.

- - - Updated - - -

But even if we stick to thought crimes, I asked in another thread, would you hire a pedophile to work in a daycare. Do pedophiles also hide their actions?

I think this analogy is closer to what you are getting at, but how do we know a pedophile is a pedophile?

Their actions.

 

[Politesse]

Only actions are... actionable. I think that is my position. I've been an educator too long to trust the administration to make good calls on what should or shouldn't count as a thought crime. They would not use such a power wisely.

Unfair scoring of exams is a serious problem, though I do not think firing people would help, as we know that this is an endemic problem: in all classrooms, across the country, minority students overwhelmingly score lower that white male ones, and though racial bias in grading is widely believed to be one of the reasons for this (as studies that anonymize the grading process strongly suggest) proving it is difficult and might perilously depopulate the teaching profession if sucessful.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

If she was truly a secret Nazi, then she would not be spreading her Nazi propaganda in her classroom.

In other words, fire her for her actual actions, not her secret thoughts.

- - - Updated - - -

But even if we stick to thought crimes, I asked in another thread, would you hire a pedophile to work in a daycare. Do pedophiles also hide their actions?

I think this analogy is closer to what you are getting at, but how do we know a pedophile is a pedophile?

Their actions.

What about if they admit it? Then you know. Or if they have a website and podcast, then you also know. This makes the analogy closer except (1) we may perceive risk as worse from a pedophile and (2) maybe we perceive a daycare as private and a school public.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes, why are we even discussing this?

See posts in the thread. There is in fact a debate and it's not between Nazis and non-Nazis or between good guys and bad guys, but amongst liberals/or maybe the left.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Teacher is allegedly identarian, what Underseer would call a "free speech advocate." She lied about it and spread ideology in the classroom. Is it okay to fire her?

Yes. She has a right to her speech and beliefs and stupidity. She doesn't have a right to employment, that I can tell. White supremacy is not a 'protected class' and has no real complaint against discriminatory behavior from employers.

aa

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Only actions are... actionable. I think that is my position. I've been an educator too long to trust the administration to make good calls on what should or shouldn't count as a thought crime. They would not use such a power wisely.

So to be clear...if a daycare employee was found to have a podcast where they admitted to being a pedophile (attracted to children) and advocated for politically changing the age of consent to something much lower, you would consider that a thought crime. Therefore, you would not be in favor of firing the person.

Likewise, if a social studies teacher was a Nazi (who would have to hold back urges to indoctrinate children and would see them through a racially biased lense and would be okay with the Jewish, Muslim, and Black ones being eradicated) with a podcast where they go on about Muslims being eradicated and "the Jewish question," then that is a thought crime. Wait until they do something...

I will add that the teacher didn't try to kill anyone this time. All she did was use her free speech to disagree with the curriculum to the children and teach them her slanted views. And felt entitled to lie to administrators about it because she thought her free speech rights were being violated.

So, to confirm, you are not okay with firing her. You are also not okay with firing teachers for being Nazis. And not okay with firing pedophiles from daycares or is that one different?

 

[SLD]

All employees of the government should, and indeed must, take an oath to the government, including the constitution of the United States (presuming this is the US were talking about). Those who violate that oath or who advocate against the constitution should be terminated from government employment. Simple.

SLD

 

[Patooka]

Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes, why are we even discussing this?

See posts in the thread. There is in fact a debate and it's not between Nazis and non-Nazis or between good guys and bad guys, but amongst liberals/or maybe the left.

Here are the key points I took from your original post and the article you linked:

-Teacher has some pretty repugnant beliefs and opinions. Not controversial. A teacher who thinks Shakespeare was a hack is controversial. Darkies are intrinsically inferior to whities is a belief antithetical to an education system.
-Teacher did not keep these thoughts/beliefs to herself, she felt compelled to attempt to indoctrinate her students with such opinions
-When confronted by it, Teacher lied and kept on doing it.

So off she goes. The other posts in the discuss a bunch of hypothetical what ifs, but to answer to original question,"Is it okay to fire her?" the only conclusion I can reach is, "Yes, why are we even discussing this?"

 

[Politesse]

Only actions are... actionable. I think that is my position. I've been an educator too long to trust the administration to make good calls on what should or shouldn't count as a thought crime. They would not use such a power wisely.

So to be clear...if a daycare employee was found to have a podcast where they admitted to being a pedophile (attracted to children) and advocated for politically changing the age of consent to something much lower, you would consider that a thought crime. Therefore, you would not be in favor of firing the person.

Likewise, if a social studies teacher was a Nazi (who would have to hold back urges to indoctrinate children and would see them through a racially biased lense and would be okay with the Jewish, Muslim, and Black ones being eradicated) with a podcast where they go on about Muslims being eradicated and "the Jewish question," then that is a thought crime. Wait until they do something...

I will add that the teacher didn't try to kill anyone this time. All she did was use her free speech to disagree with the curriculum to the children and teach them her slanted views. And felt entitled to lie to administrators about it because she thought her free speech rights were being violated.

So, to confirm, you are not okay with firing her. You are also not okay with firing teachers for being Nazis. And not okay with firing pedophiles from daycares or is that one different?

Uh, no. Someone who is advocating discriminatory views in the classroom is not "using their free speech", they are violating their role as an educator and can justly be fired. Someone who writes something discriminatory on a blog or podcast with their proper name, is also within the bounds of censure, as their actions reflect on the institution and could easily end up creating an uncomfortable situation for the children. Advocating for legalized pedophilia is again a public action, and well within the bounds of censure considering their role.

I am not comfortable with penalizing someone for what they think, though. I do not think the government possesses or could possess an ethical apparatus for persecuting a thought crime that is not somehow connected to a demonstrable behavior, nor would this be ideal. It's all very well to talk about issues like pedophilia and genocide where you can expect broad agreement, but such an apparatus would inevitably be used to control thoughts you do not personally want to be prosecutable. And frankly, the perception that the government desires to control freedom of thought has historically had an incendiary effect on American politics. Any legal action should be taken on the basis of demonstrable behavior, not accused thoughts.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Only actions are... actionable. I think that is my position. I've been an educator too long to trust the administration to make good calls on what should or shouldn't count as a thought crime. They would not use such a power wisely.

So to be clear...if a daycare employee was found to have a podcast where they admitted to being a pedophile (attracted to children) and advocated for politically changing the age of consent to something much lower, you would consider that a thought crime. Therefore, you would not be in favor of firing the person.

Likewise, if a social studies teacher was a Nazi (who would have to hold back urges to indoctrinate children and would see them through a racially biased lense and would be okay with the Jewish, Muslim, and Black ones being eradicated) with a podcast where they go on about Muslims being eradicated and "the Jewish question," then that is a thought crime. Wait until they do something...

I will add that the teacher didn't try to kill anyone this time. All she did was use her free speech to disagree with the curriculum to the children and teach them her slanted views. And felt entitled to lie to administrators about it because she thought her free speech rights were being violated.

So, to confirm, you are not okay with firing her. You are also not okay with firing teachers for being Nazis. And not okay with firing pedophiles from daycares or is that one different?

Uh, no. Someone who is advocating discriminatory views in the classroom is not "using their free speech", they are violating their role as an educator and can justly be fired. Someone who writes something discriminatory on a blog or podcast with their proper name, is also within the bounds of censure, as their actions reflect on the institution and could easily end up creating an uncomfortable situation for the children. Advocating for legalized pedophilia is again a public action, and well within the bounds of censure considering their role.

I am not comfortable with penalizing someone for what they think, though. I do not think the government possesses or could possess an ethical apparatus for persecuting a thought crime that is not somehow connected to a demonstrable behavior, nor would this be ideal. It's all very well to talk about issues like pedophilia and genocide where you can expect broad agreement, but such an apparatus would inevitably be used to control thoughts you do not personally want to be prosecutable. And frankly, the perception that the government desires to control freedom of thought has historically had an incendiary effect on American politics. Any legal action should be taken on the basis of demonstrable behavior, not accused thoughts.

Hold on though. She didn't use her real name on the blog where she advocated eradicating Muslims. Let's suppose we have no evidence of her classroom misbehaviors. Then, you'd not be okay with firing her? Likewise for the pedophile, if he/she confided in someone they were a pedophile, but didn't write any policy position at all, it's a thought crime. You wrote before that it's actions that are actionable, not thoughts.

See, I disagree. I think non-protected classes that carry unusual risk to co-workers, customers, kids on the job ought to be assessed. So if a Nazi wants to be a nurse at a Jewish retirement home (if there is such a thing), then I'd say no. If a Nazi wants to teach my son social studies and will grade minority kids in the classroom I would say no. If someone says they are attracted to children, they ought not work in a daycare. Employment of non-protected classes is not a right. Risk to humans is how to assess circumstances, not reactive management after damage is done.

 

[RavenSky]

Hold on though. She didn't use her real name on the blog where she advocated eradicating Muslims. Let's suppose we have no evidence of her classroom misbehaviors.

Part of the reason she has not yet been fired is that the school board's position is that they can not prove it was her in the blog, and have been unable to prove that she has done anything in school itself (though there have been complaints)

IF, per your examples, she fully and freely admitted the blog was hers and the thoughts/confessions expressed therein were hers, and those thoughts/expressions indicated that she didn't/wouldn't/couldn't teach her students in a fair, unbigoted, unharmful manner, I think that would be "actions" and the school board could fire her.

Since she denies it, unfortunately, the school board needs something that is undeniably her actions (in school or elsewhere) that indicates she is incapable of teaching her children in a fair and unbiased manner (or is a danger to them).

I agree with Politesse, it is easy to suggest that the Nazi or the pedophile be fired because of how repugnant their thoughts are, but school boards used to fire atheists and homosexuals for the same reason.