Kind of a puny book burning IMO. Apparently the college moved her from her provided hotel to one in another town because some students went to her hotel and hung around outside it, like they were going to protest her further.

This book is a novel from ~2015.

The author followed that first book up with a new book of essays published last month, My Time Among the Whites: Notes from an Unfinished Education. Apparently, she herself did graduate from college but she wanted to write from the perspective of minorities who drop out of collage and blame the white people. Her first book is an all-school read at 25+ universities around the country and she is "an associate professor in the Department of English and the Institute for Ethnic Studies at the University of Nebraska". She is no doubt on the tenure track and will have a nice career bitching about white people for decades to come.

"... written by a Hispanic author who had suggested white people are treated differently in society."

Because white people behave differently.

Other students were dismayed over the book burning, a violent rejection of speech most notoriously associated with Nazi Germany.

Well, the Germans didn't use a backyard grill. And they didn't burn the books of just one author.

But they did have one thing in common -- students burned those books in Nazi Germany, not the government.

But they did have one thing in common -- students burned those books in Nazi Germany, not the government.

Thanks for the information. I never knew that. I guess I just assumed it was the government. Thank You.

But they did have one thing in common -- students burned those books in Nazi Germany, not the government.

Not so fast.

The Nazis had taken over the German students union. They then attacked the Berlin's Institute for Sex Research, burning 20,000 books and 5,000 photos. Notice they initially portrayed themselves as protecting traditional morality against the pervs. And during the interregnum, Germany was certainly a hotbed of sexual perversion. Like Italy but more so.

From there, the Nazi student union expanded its burnings to Karl Marx and a popularizer of Marxism, the Czech-Austrian writer/philospher Kautsky. They then expanded their list of books to burn.

[T]he exclusion of "Left", democratic, and Jewish literature took precedence over everything else. The black-lists ... ranged from Bebel, Bernstein, Preuss, and Rathenau through Einstein, Freud, Brecht, Brod, Döblin, Kaiser, the Mann brothers, Zweig, Plievier, Ossietzky, Remarque, Schnitzler, and Tucholsky, to Barlach, Bergengruen, Broch, Hoffmannsthal, Kästner, Kasack, Kesten, Kraus, Lasker-Schüler, Unruh, Werfel, Zuckmayer, and Hesse. The catalogue went back far enough to include literature from Heine and Marx to Kafka.[3]

But it was always a Nazi organization, deeply embedded in the Nazi party structure who burned books.

Let's not have any of this "The Nazis didn't burn any books, it was just some unruly students".

It was the Nazis. Period.

Let's not have any of this "The Nazis didn't burn any books, it was just some unruly students".

It was the Nazis. Period.

I did a quick google search before posting. It said students at universities burned the books. Ok they were nazi students. Kind of like Antifa.

The Nazis had taken over the German students union.

The Nazi government? If the Nazi government wanted to burn books there was nothing to stop them.

No doubt these German students were part of the Nazi Party, so if you want to claim "Nazis" burned books I won't argue. But my point was that it wasn't the Nazi government.

I'm guessing the students who burned Jennine Capó Crucet’s books are conservatives and members of the Republican Party. Are history books going to blame the federal government because Trump was President?

Because white people behave differently.

Shhhhhh!

You are NOT supposed to say that!

What are you,some sort of racist?

I'm temped to report you to the Tan Klan!

Burning books is ALWAYS a political act.

Sometimes it's the Nazis,and sometimes it's the Bible-Thumpers,and sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.

No doubt these German students were part of the Nazi Party, so if you want to claim "Nazis" burned books I won't argue. But my point was that it wasn't the Nazi government.

The early book burnings, Kristallnacht, the Night of the Long Knives, all were directly instigated by the Nazi party.

There was, effectively, no separation between Nazi government and the Nazi party. Any distinctions were mostly arbitrary. The Nazi government did what the Nazi party wanted. And the party did what Hitler wanted. That was kind of the whole point.

Hitler youth. Antifa is exactly like them.

The early book burnings, Kristallnacht, the Night of the Long Knives, all were directly instigated by the Nazi party.

For the second time. That's not the issue. I said the book burnings were not carried out by the German government. And they weren't. They were done by university students who, more than likely, were members of the Nazi Party.

Kristallnacht was carried out by the Sturmabteilung (SA) who were the Brown Shirts, a paramilitary organization.

The Night of the Long Knives was a government operation, but it was directed against the Sturmabteilung and their supporters who were getting too big for their britches.

Hitler youth. Antifa is exactly like them.

The Hitler Youth supported Hitler and the Nazi government.

Antifa is an anti- government terrorist mob.

Kristallnacht was carried out by the Sturmabteilung (SA) who were the Brown Shirts, a paramilitary organization.

The Night of the Long Knives was a government operation, but it was directed against the Sturmabteilung and their supporters who were getting too big for their britches.

Not wanting to get into this in great detail, but aren't you giving the SA in Kristallnacht and the even SS (and Gestapo and Goering's secret police) in the Night massacre a successful Nuremberg defense? The S.A. is described as "a paramilitary organization" but in truth they were civilians with no official standing with the German state. Aren't you trying to say these thugs were "just following orders"?

I'm saying the Nazi party was the source of the political sentiment and the source of the persons who carried out these pogroms (and the book burnings). And they were the party in power that ignored their duty to uphold the law during these flagrant offenses against existing German law. In fact, German law in the Nazi era became completely irrelevant whenever it conflicted with party doctrine in official and non-official policy, including organized mass violence. German law was, for practical purposes, what the Nazi party wanted it to be and what was written as established statutory law was irrelevant.

All of it came directly from the Nazi party and nowhere else.

Aren't you trying to say these thugs were "just following orders"?

Not at all. Actually, I think the SA was a loose cannon and was viewed as a threat by the German government. Hence the Night of the Long knives.

The Hitler Youth supported Hitler and the Nazi government.

They were conscripted into the Nazi party youth organization at an early age. Very few could resist as there were considerable consequences, including the possibility that your entire family could get sent to a concentration camp as subversives.

Many would have joined Hitler Youth anyway. But certainly not everyone. Hitler Youth was a method to try to remake the entire political outlook of the German nation in the Nazi mold, sweeping away German traditions of political freedom, democracy, established laws and their enforcement, human rights, etc.

Antifa is an anti- government terrorist mob.

One could make that same description of the Nazi party's S.A. division. Recruited from thugs and the uneducated and especially in prisons, the S.A. were the street fighters and shock troops of the Nazi party. At the time, the Communists of Germany were quite militant and had their own paramilitary fighting wing. The S.A. street fighters did battle with the Commie street fighters in many major cities around Germany, particularly in southeastern Germany, a real hotbed of communist activity. At the end of WW I, for instance, the German commies instituted their own soviet, the Bavarian Soviet Republic. Those elements and sympathies did remain during the Twenties and part of what helped the Nazis gain power was the public's fear of communist takeover of parts of Germany, a dismemberment of the German state along the lines of the Bolshevik takeover of Tsarist Russia. Hitler ranted against the commies endlessly during his rise to become chancellor.

I would compare Antifa to the Nazi S.A. as the most similar organization. Except this time, Antifa is a pro-Left pro-commie movement where the S.A. was an anti-communist movement in practice. But what led Hitler to exterminate the S.A. leadership was Rohm's insistence on fulfilling Nazi doctrine that the S.A. would become a merger of their thugs with the German army. The price of the industrialists and the Army for Hitler's chancellorship was the elimination of the S.A. Rohm kept insisting on fulfilling the socialist part of the NSDAP (Nazi) name.

Many of these stormtroopers believed in the socialist promise of National Socialism. They expected the Nazi regime to take more radical economic action, such as breaking up the vast landed estates of the aristocracy, once they obtained national power.[19] By the time Hitler assumed power in January 1933, SA membership had increased to approximately 2,000,000—twenty times as large as the number of troops and officers in the Reichswehr (German Army).

The S.A. was 20 times bigger than the army Germany was allowed to have under the Versailles treaty and it did contain a great many veterans, along with a large number of ex-officers downsized from the army. The Prussian military families did not intend to allow that rabble of homegrown socialist commies to take over their army. So Hitler killed off the S.A. leadership to appease them.

Anyway, Antifa does bring the S.A. to mind. Compelled collectivization, wealth redistribution, establishing the state as the means of coerced wealth transfer, street violence, etc.

The S.A. did share one thing with the commie street fighters: socialist doctrine. They were just fighting over who was supposed to enjoy the spoils of victory.