"History will repeat itself if we are unwilling to confront Marxist apologists who masquerade as competent educators."

my distillation of this article: https://www.dailywire.com/news/49474/adams-how-confront-and-cross-examine-incompetent-ashe-schow

the background:

"[A public high school student] took a world geography class that was taught by a socialist. In the class, the teacher tried to advance his socialist ideas. In the process, he claimed that a) communist countries founded on Marxist principles are “not that bad,” and that b) students’ unfavorable impression of communist nations is the result of brainwashing by their parents."

the questions:

"According to The Black Book of Communism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999, page 4), Communist China has killed at least 65 million of its own citizens. Would you say that communism was “not that bad” for those 65 million murdered citizens?
According to the same source, the Soviet Union killed at least 20 million of its own citizens. Would you say that communism was “not that bad” for those 20 million murdered citizens?
According to the same source, communist North Korea has killed at least two million of its own citizens. Would you say that communism was “not that bad” for those two million murdered citizens?
According to the same source, communist Cambodia has killed at least two million of its own citizens. Would you say that communism was “not that bad” for those two million murdered citizens?
And still according to the same source, Vietnam has killed at least one million of its own citizens. Would you say that communism was “not that bad” for those one million murdered citizens?

and the thought experiment:

Imagine there are two countries. One country has so many illegal immigrants crossing its borders that it has to build a wall to keep them out. The other country has to build a wall just to keep its own citizens in. Which country would you say is “not that bad?”

the guidelines for asking these questions:

"The first guideline is that students who take on socialist teachers must be mindful of the fact that there is no chance that they will influence the teacher. Their real target is the impressionable student who needs to have a stone planted in his shoe to get him to critically evaluate the teacher’s indoctrination.

The second guideline is that under no circumstances should the anti-socialist student make an affirmative argument in favor of capitalism. If he does that, then the teacher will simply respond with a canned answer that he has contemplated previously. A far better approach is to hit the socialist teacher with tough questions, which force the socialist to defend the record of socialism as it has actually been implemented in communist regimes throughout history."