UlrikeSchuhFricke

A silly question concerning the hotel rooms: Do we have to book them individually? If so, could you please send me the addresses?

I would like to add one point to the agenda of the meeting: besides delegating responsibilities we should decide on a schedule for the first year.

The suggestion is a good idea.

One important starting point to maybe come to new and different textbooks and curricula for me ist the present and the question in how far our every day conceptions, our expectations and our lifestyle are influenced by history. One example to illustrate what I mean is the different attitudes of European nations towards the welfare state and civil disobedience. Germany has a very long tradition and experience of the state taking care of you, catering for the basic needs of its people; it began with Frederick II of Prussai who was an absolute monarch but saw himself as the first servant of the state and saw himself like a strict father; despite the many wars he fought he was seen as a monarch who really did something to improve the life of his subjects; when Napoleon defeated Prussia high ranking officers and members of the civil service were the ones to reform an authoritarian state, what the French people had done during the revolution once again as done by the state (e.g. liberating the peasants); looking at the origins of our welfare state you once again see that the first laws (we are so proud) of were introduced by Bismarck. This has shaped our "national" character as most people still expect everything from the state and are willing to pay the price for this: obedience. Still today civil disobedience is not a high political value in Germany. If I had to write a German history book I would try to make the students realize how they are still influenced by these historical developments; on the other hand I would like to analyse the alternatives which might have been chosen and I would like to focus on the people who represented the other Germany in the 18th, 19th and 20th century. Germany textbooks try to encourage critical thinking but Frederick II is still called the Great and even though our curricula demand that Germany and her history are to be seen and analysed in a wider European context our textbooks still focus very much on classical German topics.

I would like to include another aspect: how national/"nationalistic" are the textbooks we use in our classes. Compared to the history books we use in our German schools the Politics/Citizenship books still focus on Germany and German problems. It goes without saying that students have to know their own political system, its historic roots, the polticial/social/economic problem their own nation(s) faces but I also think that materials used in a good citizenship course must include European/international topics - not as an extra but as an integral part of a curriculum aiming at an understanding and assessment of Europe and the world.

Here are my data: Ulrike Schuh-Fricke Institution: Gymnasium Neue Oberschule Subjects: Politics/Citizenship, History, English Country: Germany Town: Braunschweig

I agree with the statements that a "good citizenship" course should focus on rights and duties. Even though one article of the German constitution explicitly calls for civil disobedience and resistance if/when our democracy is in danger or challenged, civil disobedience is seen by many as something unwanted, something which is not rooted in German history. So I think that thinking critically, being a nuisance or embarrasement(sometimes) for the "good German citizens" is a major aim of education and especially of the subject citizenship/politics. Encouraging the students to think critically , to question decisisons also helps to boost their self-confidence. Let me give you an example: Two years ago one of my classes (I was their form teacher, their English, History and Citizenship teacher; it was a year 9; age group: 14-15) dealt with the topic "Industrial Revolution" and child labor; in the English and Citizenship lessons I asked them to read and discuss texts dealing with child labour today. One of the articles dealt with child slavery in West Africa, especially on the cocoa plantations. Via the articles they learnt that most of the chocolate they ate contained the "blood" of children in West Africa. They were so enraged that they wanted to start a project to stop child slavery and they decided to write letters to the main European and American chocolate producers and the German Bundestag. Then they took the letters and went through all the classes and courses in our school and asked the other students to sign them. In the end nearly 800 signatures had been collected and we sent the letters and the signatures to the main producers. Very quickly all of them answered and the letters were rather long and not of a prefabricated,suitable- for-all-occassions type. Some of the answers enraged the students again because some corporations blamed them of having become the victims of propaganda and manipulation, which the students had not, unless you call UNICEF and UNESCO material "propaganda". None of the students had the notion that they really did manage to stop child slavery or that we forced corporations like Masterfoods or Nestlé to change their policies, but still they were proud of what they had done; and the students did profit from the project in various ways and one was a recognizable boost of their self-confidence ( the school yearbook and the local paper wrote articles about the project).

A lot of important points have already been mentioned. One important aspect for me and my students is to see how other political systems (election, organisation of Parliaments, local goverment; means and opportunities of particpation etc.) work and which values and principles they are based on. The first step of the project for me would be to define for ourselves what "citizenship" is and what we think makes "good" citizen. This can be the basis for the material and projects we develop and initiate. As we will be working on an international/European level I support Juan Carlos' and Caterina Gasparini's suggestions of giving the project a European dimension. As I think that teaching Citizenship/Politics is more than asking students to read different texts and as I believe that the only way this subject leave a lasting and sustainable impression on the students is to help them get involved, the challenge of the project would be to combine the international/European dimension with the students participating actively in some projects.

I am German and I have been a teacher for the last 26 years. Germany still has a three tiered school system and I am a teacher at a Grammar school in Braunschweig, which is in Lower Saxony. The name of my school is Neue Oberschule; the "neu=new" meaning that when the school was founded at the end of the 19th century it offered a new curriculum focussing on modern languages (at that time Spanish) rather than on Latin. I think we still are a school which is open for new ideas and projects. A couple of years ago we already participated in a Comenius project; French, Swedish and a British school were involved. The main focus was the introduction of the Euro and how young people perceive their European neighbours. Together with some students I researched the consumer habits of the young people in our years 9, 10 and 11. At the moment my school is once again part of a Comenius project, this time focussing on Mathematics and the abilities of students from different countries at the end of middle school. This project is in its second year. Normally we have four classes in every year and two of those classes are bilingual classes, which means that the subjects History, Geography, P.E. (from year 7 on) and Politics/Citzenship (from year 9; in two years time from year 8 on) are taught in English. My subjects are English, History, and Politics/Citizenship.

I am on an excursion from Sept. 19 to Sept. 23. Every other week/weekend is free.

Dear Andy, thanks for another good idea for a lesson. I will try it out in my English class in the new school year - if I manage to use and open the files.

I too think that much has been done in Germany to come to terms with our past. But I think that this process must go on. Once again we have Neo Nazis in a German Länder Parliament (Saxony) and those are not the old die-hards but young people. With the economy in recession and our government doing everything to dismantle most of our welfare systems many people feel left in the cold and are tempted to look for yet another strong leader. Many believe that we need more and stricter rules and laws especially ones limiting and controlling the influx of ethnic minorities who are seen as a danger to our culture and our civilization and who are blamed for taking away jobs Germans could have. The Downfall scenes I saw Hitler was shown as a maniac determined to destroy Germany forever. But those scenes also made him "attractive" in a bizarre way: he was shown as a man who was true to himself even in his final minutes. Looking at the British textbooks or maybe I should say looking at the rather small number of textbooks or pages in textbooks covering this topic I would say no. At the moment I am teaching a History course dealing with Imperialism and the British Empire and it is very difficult to find British textbooks about this subject. There are many pages on the Internet but it takes quite some time to find and select the sources I need.

When the film was launched in Germany I decided not to see it. My very personal reasons were and still are that I do not want the images which I have in my mind about the final days in the bunker to be influenced and changed by a film. These images and imaginations are based on the various documents and I-witness reports I read. Let me give you an example to make myself better understood: I know that Martha Goebbels poisoned her children. I really do not need and want to see this; my imagination will always be more horrifying than a scene in a film. I do not need to see the scene to know and understand how brutal and inhuman this act was. I whole-heartedly agree but based on the parts of the film I did see I think that the film is not to my liking. I grant the film makers that they had the best intentions possible, but showing Hitler as a ranting maniac makes it easy not only for my parent generation but also for my generation and the generations to come to blame everything on him, to once again say that the German people had become the victims of a maniac and his bunch of cronies and that they were not really to blame. The post- war generations cannot be blamed for the crimes their parents and grandparents committed but it must be their/my responsibility (and they -or better we-owe this to the ones who fought against the regime) to find out why Hitler could seize power so easily, why so many actively or passively supported the Holocaust, why so many reported wives, friends and neighbours to the Gestapo knowing exactly what the Gestapo did (not everything happened in the dark of the night), why only a small number joined the resistance and why even in the very final days, when everyone knew that the war was lost, children were willing to sacrifice their lives and mayors had to be forced the show the white flag to safe the remains and inhabitants of their towns and cities. A film like Downfall does not help with these difficult questions - I am afraid that it does quite the opposite: offer the simple answer that no one can be blamed because they all were victims of a psychopath, the pawns in Hitler's game. So why bother dealing with that horrible history and asking oneself disquieting questions leading to even more disquieting answers.

Thank you very much for the very concise and precise definition and explanation of what Holocaust denial means and what those defending it really intend. As I do not want this thread to revive the debate we had before I would suggest that we as teachers consider and discuss if we would read some Holocaust denial texts in class to analyse and evaluate their line of argumentation.

John, how and where can I get access to those files. Is it possible to read them on the Internet?

Zundel ... Obviously German Holocaust deniers seem once again to be in a league of their own because none of them can and would like to be called "a pacifist" and all of them advocate violence not only against the Jews but against all ethnic minorities in Germany. All of the German deniers of the Holcaust are closely affiliated with the German Neo-Nazi scene and in their writings they not only deny Auschwitz and the Holcaust but they also call for violent action to drive the Jews and the ethnic minorities (especially the Turks and their families) out of Germany. They do not hide their views but use every opportunity - among them the court trials- to make them public. The sentences which sent the deniers to prison were reached on the basis of the rule of law (as I pointed out before); the trails were open to the public, the defendants were represented by lawyers of their own choosing; the defendants had every right and chance to appeal the verdicts (which most of them did; some cases even going to up to our Supreme Court) and they now serve their sentences in German prisons.

All the German "Holocaust Deniers" had a fair trial following the rules and standards of democratic states and the rule of law: the trials were public; they had their lawyers and could say what they wanted, they had the right to appeal and most of them did - without success. However faulty our democracy may be I object to having it compared with the Stalinist system. Don, you keep on saying that those who belive that the Holocuast happened and that it is an undisputable fact have not given any proof, but this is simply not true. I do not want to repeat myself, so go back to some of my previous postings and simply check my sources for a change. I agree with you that trying to kill someone by setting his house on fire or planting bombs close to him are criminal acts and no means of free and democratic discourse. But that some of those who do not agree with Zundel's statements use violence does not make him an innocent victim and does not make his statements true or less criminal.

The song might sound rather innocent without the whole context, but quite honestly I would be aghast if my students sang that song. In the final days of World War II hundreds of "Quexes" were sent to the front and were killed or severly injured: they obediently followed the song they had learnt by heart and till the very end they were blinded by an ideology so cunningly hidden in the film about the heroic Hitlerjunge Quex.

I saw the whole film once. It was part of a seminar anlysing the extremely propagandistic films made by the Nazi film industry. The main question was if the film or parts of it should be used in our history lessons. We decided against it because this films and other (more glorifying ones and more racist and vile ones) are very cleverly made and you end up being caught in the aesthetics of the film and the way the scenes are shot and the story is presented. Even though we knew about the intention and aim of the film we found ourselves somehow fascinated by and caught by it. As images have a more lasting effect and impact on us than words we thought showing the films to classes my be slightly dangerous even though the film would be analysed and its propaganda exposed afterwards. In Germany this film and others are not available for "public" use but for scientific research only.

Very informative and helpful. Thank you

Dear Andy I would like to have a look at the online lesson about the Indian Mutiny and I would like to use it in my year 12 History course (Imperialism and the British Empire) but unfortunately I cannot open the link. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/quote Sorry, when I tried the second time I was given access

Dear Andy I would like to have a look at the online lesson about the Indian Mutiny and I would like to use it in my year 12 History course (Imperialism and the British Empire) but unfortunately I cannot open the link.

I think you can find many examples of how freedom of speech has been oppressed by various dicatorships and I think we all know that governments of democratic states are tempted to curtail this right when faced by a major crisi or attack. I do not want to downplay the dangers such actions entail. But I would like to pick up one thread of this forum again: is a teacher allowed to express his own political views and opinions in class or must he/she remain neutral so that he/she does not influence/manipulate the students. I - in a way - have never been neutral. I am neutral when I present the facts (though of course I know that selecting facts may be influenced by the aims and the conculsions you want to reach) but once we have reached the stage of taking sides and expressing opinion clearly I do not mince words and for instance say what I think of the things my government does. For me not saying explicitly what my perspective is would mean lying to the students and not being open with them. I try to show clearly (e.g. with the help of words and expressions I choose) what my personla opinion is, what it is based on. My students know that in the lessons or in an exam I would never would mark their opinion only the way they present and explain their ideas. A problem for me is what to do with the ideas of the far right. One of my politics classes once wanted to do some research on the websites of the neo-nazis to find out how inhuman, dangerous and violent their ideology really is and if they dare to express their ideas openly. When they asked me I mus say I was not very happy and I didn't want to do it because those sites are cleverly made and can be attractive to some ( it was a year 9 class). I first asked the parents and after some consideration we spent some lessons on researching those websites. Important was that afterwards - during the debate in class - everybody could freely express his/her own feelings and reactions to the propaganda and strategy revealed on the neo-nazi websites (Holocaust denial is a staple argument of those sites). None of the students really felt attracted by the slogans and programmes.

Don, Dennis, read Reinhard Hoess' autobiography. He answers all your questions and he did all the sums and calculations you pretend to be interested in.When he was in charge of Auschwitz (1941-1942) he kept a very tidy and precise "business" diary - the perfect German accountant - and wrote down exactly how many trains came in, how many people the trains carried, how many gas was needed to kill the largest number of people in less than 20 minutes, how many people were sent to the gas chambers immediately and how many were sent to work in Auschwitz and its affiliates. He also wrote down how many gold teeth had been extracted, how many hair collected, how many pairs of shoes could be sent to German soldiers etc. For Hoess Auschwitz was a large factory whose product and profit was the huge number of people killed every hour and day and like every good capitalist the most important thing for Hoess was to increase the output (numbers of people killed in less time than before) and he was extremely successful. Hoess was a fervent fascist and Nazi and when he wrote his autobiography his only aim was to show the world how sucessful he had been and that he was not to blame for what had happened as he had been following orders only. I am not sure if the English version of his autobiography is still available but I am sure that if you trawl the net you will come across one. He was too successful a nazi for the neo-nazis in all countries not to keep his book in print. By the way if you want to find out how Auschwitz is spelled and where you can find it Hoess' book can help you with that as well: he drew a map of Germany in 1942 (=Germany+Austria+the major part of France+Poland+the later CSSR+ parts of the then USSR) dotted with hundreds of major and minor camps where people were gassed or "worked" to death.

I am very sorry, but the way this debate is going makes me sick and it is a humiliation for the victims and their families. There is plenty of evidence for the Nazi programme to exterminate the Jews in Europe and Hitler even started talks with Arabs in Palestine to continue the killing once the war was won (which -thank God - did not happen). There is a countless number of books which answer all the questions like the one above and they do so in a scientific manner (Goldhagen: Hitler's willing Executioners; the confession of Hoess the commander of Auschwitz, ...) Fortunately there are survivors still who can tell their stories. There are the films either made by the Nazis themselves to demonstrate to the world how "marvellous" German energy combined with the latest machinery and chemical products was, films made by those army units who liberated the camps or the long and detailed documentary made by Claud Lanzman (Shoah) interviewing victims and those who lived near the railway lines and camps in Poland and saw what was going on. The gas chambers were working around the clock, the trains were coming in day in and day out and there was no need to dig holes for bodies, beacuse the bodies were burnt and the ashes scattered on the fields surrounding the camp. Germans were only standing guard and filling the cyclone B into the chambers while the main job was done by prisoners who were still strong enough to remove the bodies from the gas chambers; most of those who had to do that were gassed after some time. Finally, I only can repeat my very personal credo and conviction: One person killed in the name of racism of the worst kind possible (and that is the Nazi theory of the different races and everything it entailed) is one person too many. A P.S. for Denis: You will not be able to meet someone who lives or has lived in Auschwitz if you cannot even spell its name properly.