by Peter Löcke //
Understanding people instead of judging them on impulse. Reading and understanding what a publicly criticized person says in their own words instead of assuming what others say. For this reason, the plain-speaking club regularly interviews people with the defamatory label "controversial". This is why we are translating Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin. It is always an offer to form your own opinion at the source.
What applies to Putin also applies to Jan-Dirk Zimmermann. This is the name of the principal of the Richard-Wossidlo-Gymnasium in Ribnitz-Damgarten, who has been heavily criticized and who called the police to his school. A whistleblower had previously alerted the principal to the fact that a 16-year-old girl was allegedly spreading dangerous right-wing extremist content on TikTok. Was the subsequent dangerous speech an intrusive police interrogation or a friendly educational talk? Was the occasion really just a harmless Smurf video or was there more to it? Did the police and principal resort to Stasi methods or did they act strictly according to the rules? Nothing is known for sure. It feels like the whole of Germany has already commented on the incident except for the person who initiated the process. The principal himself has not yet issued a statement. That's why I'm withholding judgment.
Understanding people instead of judging them on impulse. So let's let Jan-Dirk Zimmermann have his say. On May 5, 2022, almost two years ago, the principal gave an interview to the "Spaß am Lesen Verlag" publishing house. Form your own opinion at the source! Naturally, this old interview is not about the "Loretta case", which is hotly debated today. Nevertheless, it helps to delve into the principal's thoughts.
"What consequences of school closures and distance learning do you observe among pupils?"
Zimmermann's answer to this question should be brought to the fore. His answer makes me angry in more ways than one. Here at the source, I think justified criticism is legitimate.
"I see negative changes in around a third of the pupils in a class. This particularly affects children and young people who had no access to the internet or a place to retreat due to their social status or living situation. Pupils with a migrant background who have not been able to take a language course have large gaps. In the various subjects, learning deficits of one to one and a half years can be observed. In addition, there are psychological problems, including suicidal thoughts, which sometimes require hospitalization. However, there are also around two to three pupils per year group who have improved. For autistic students, for example, this time was extremely beneficial for their performance."
Negative changes in a third of pupils. In addition, considerable learning deficits, psychological problems, suicidal thoughts and hospital stays.
With all due respect, critical people warned of precisely this collateral damage to an entire generation of young people in 2020. They predicted it. This is exactly what would happen if schools were closed for longer. These critics were ignored and defamed. In May 2022, Zimmermann soberly analyzes what courageous people had urgently warned about two years earlier. But I don't read a trace of self-criticism and personal responsibility in the response. Of course the principal did not initiate the closures. He did not. He did no more than any other principal in Germany. But the teachers did something else. They decided in favor of orders and regulations and against the well-being of the children. They confused blind obedience with solidarity. They covered their ears and eyes when it mattered.
Jan-Dirk Zimmermann's answer contains something else with scandalous potential. It is about the topic of inclusion.
The period of school closures was extremely beneficial for autistic people. This statement by the principal is no surprise either. Critics of inclusion have been claiming this for some time. Ironically, the school closures were a great field test of how "disadvantaged" children develop when they are not forced into mainstream education. So what happens to the autistic children when schools reopen? These children are reintegrated into the "normal" school routine. To their own disadvantage, to the advantage of the "inclusion at all costs" world view. Inclusion may be pedagogically correct in some cases, but not in others. It continues to be imposed by regulation.
What is currently recommended and ordered? Education Minister Stark-Watzinger suggests Civil defense exercises for pupils. She wants youth officers in schools and a "relaxed relationship" with the Bundeswehr. The teachers' association welcomes the. Will principals and teachers once again act according to orders, regulations and for the good of politics? Or will they finally act in the best interests of the child?
People are outraged by personal stories such as the story of 16-year-old schoolgirl Loretta. Because much still seems unclear and contradictory here, as sources are missing and the head teacher has not yet made a statement, I will refrain from passing judgment. However, there are millions of children with learning deficits and even psychological problems due to the inhumane policies of recent years. Like Loretta, these children have a face and a name. And no one, no politician, no teachers' association, no head teacher takes responsibility for the suffering of these children.
Articles identified by name do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher.
5 Responses
Thanks to Dr. Herbert Wessel for pointing out the possibility of remonstration, which in my opinion is rarely used. Why is that?
Loyalty to the line is easier than loyalty to the law. Anyone who uses the word "honor" today is often considered strange, if not unpredictable. They quickly become controversial.
In my opinion, the principal should have first clarified what facts were supposed to have been said and (!) who is the block captain who is incriminating here, in memoriam Causa Aiwanger, instead of invoking (what ominous) regulations. The underage pupils entrusted to his care are first and foremost worthy of protection before this coram publico exposure with three police officers has caused any damage. The principal should have apologized immediately and publicly.
The principal Zimmermann referred to regulations.
In my opinion, he has failed pedagogically in several respects.
His most serious omission was to immediately
"cavalry" instead of talking to the student and her parents first.
We can only speculate as to what prompted him to do this.
Was it perhaps his political convictions, his
Teaching institution before each
"right-wing" influence?
What did the defendants in the Nuremberg Auschwitz trial refer to again? Wasn't the word also called regulation?
If it were so easy to justify even the most disgusting crime, no
Nazi perpetrators should be sentenced, because all these terrible crimes were based on regulations.
As I understand it, Mr. Zimmermann relied on instructions; if he had perceived them as unlawful, he could or perhaps even should have remonstrated. It is similar with the police officers, they can very well assess the legal situation. This incident shows the actual legal practice in public and criminal law. I don't want to be a civil servant these days, I see many people in my job who suffer mentally under their working conditions, and a disproportionate number of them are civil servants. This extreme hierarchy, the sometimes absurd decrees and instructions and the often cruel working atmosphere take their toll. If you then think about what you do all day long, it's no longer nice...