It's "victim blaming" when expressed in polemics, but not in history. Explaining that Rome crushed Gauls/Greeks/etc. because the latter were disunited and had attacked Rome in the past is accurate. It's not a justification, but it is an explanation. (Or at least a part of one - it shouldn't be reason #1, but reason #5 is fair.)
Yes, but in this case kids probably need to be taught "the powerful capitalists choose a genocide instead of helping people, the genocides were caused first because of greed and then because of racism".
If you read the tail end of (presumably) point #4 in OP's image, you can tell the socioeconomic causes for the rise of fascism are discussed earlier. (We can't tell more without more context.)
Even in a Marxist history, if you're talking through the rise of Mussolini in detail you still have to mention - 'certain Italians were incensed by the very idea of social equality/redistribution preached by the left.'
It's "victim blaming" when expressed in polemics, but not in history. Explaining that Rome crushed Gauls/Greeks/etc. because the latter were disunited and had attacked Rome in the past is accurate. It's not a justification, but it is an explanation. (Or at least a part of one - it shouldn't be reason #1, but reason #5 is fair.)
Yes, but in this case kids probably need to be taught "the powerful capitalists choose a genocide instead of helping people, the genocides were caused first because of greed and then because of racism".
If you read the tail end of (presumably) point #4 in OP's image, you can tell the socioeconomic causes for the rise of fascism are discussed earlier. (We can't tell more without more context.)
Even in a Marxist history, if you're talking through the rise of Mussolini in detail you still have to mention - 'certain Italians were incensed by the very idea of social equality/redistribution preached by the left.'