I have long observed that Environmentalist
ideology has been snuck into our schools. Now the wife of Democratic New Jersey
Governor Phil Murphy wants to make it official: She proposes to mandate a course on climate change in NJ’s grade
schools. Does anyone actually believe that an administration that belongs to a
party that has embedded climate catastrophism into its national political
platform will formulate an objective course on the subject of climate? Just
isolating climate change as an independent course is bias. Anyway, here are
some excerpts from Everyone’s
talking about climate change. Now, New Jersey’s first lady wants that
conversation to happen in every class, too by Devna Bose. You decide:
As young people around the world are taking to the streets to show
their concern about climate change, New Jersey’s first lady wants them to
engage on the issue in school, too.
Tammy Murphy, the wife of N.J. Gov. Phil Murphy, is pushing for
climate change to be written into the state’s official academic standards,
which outline what students should learn in each grade. Murphy, who is a
longtime environmental advocate, said in an interview she was inspired by
seeing students’ reaction to the activism spurred by 16-year-old climate
activist Greta Thunberg.
“I think students are yearning for this,” Murphy said. “The level
of enthusiasm these kids have — they’re super excited about what they’re doing
and learning. We are educating the future generation of leaders.”
Environmental justice advocate and former Newark school board
member Kim Gaddy said she hoped Murphy would tap the expertise of locals in
designing climate change curriculum.
“It’s a great first step in trying to engage and inform students,”
Gaddy said. “Climate change is the next crisis that, unfortunately, our youth
is going to be faced with.”
Yes, that Greta Thunberg, the
ranting 16-year old sociopath who demands that the
world’s governments put aside all other concerns, including freedom and
prosperity, to “do something” about climate change. Yes, those demonstrators,
the climate strike children who are taking to the streets rather than stay in
school to demand an end to all reliable affordable energy, if not capitalism itself,
to save the climate from human progress.
If the climate change curriculum starts with the
premise that human-caused climate change is a crisis that requires the
subordination of every other human concern to the goal of avoiding a planetary
catastrophe, then the debate is over. It is the end of objectivity. It is the
explicit expulsion from the schools of education, in favor of Soviet-style
indoctrination.
“Climate change” is obviously
about political indoctrination, not education. Proof of political motives?
Gaddy’s use of catchphrases like “climate change crisis” and “environmental
justice”. The exalting of Greta Thunberg and her biased “climate strike” ilk as
inspiration. Murphy as “a longtime environmental advocate,” which means
anti-fossil fuels, anti-nuclear, nature over human well being.
“Climate crisis” is a
political tactic for a totalitarian socialist agenda, as activists repeatedly
tell us. Thunberg’s emotional authoritarian rant against freedom and progress
is the new face of the anti-capitalist, energy starvation, statist
Environmentalist movement that demonizes any dissenter as a “climate
denier.”
In a real classroom, a
subject is the means to an end, which is to give kids the mental tools of
objective evaluation so they can assess the facts and draw conclusions based on
proper hierarchy and context. It’s about proper thinking methods. Education is
about teaching kids how to think, not telling them what to think.
In the current environment,
climate change is the last subject that should be “taught” in schools. Its
politicization has foreclosed almost any possibility of intelligent discussion
on the subject. Murphy wants kids to “make well-reasoned arguments based on the
evidence.” Then she admits that her “vision” “aligns with her husband’s clean energy push”; i.e. his political agenda. Whose “evidence”
will the kids be given? Will Murphy’s scheme give “deniers” the prominent place
in the classroom curriculum that the children deserve to consider? Government
schools are by their nature political institutions. A climate change curricula
would only double down on politicization.
Climate change, objectively
framed, is an important subject—too important to be “written into the state’s
official academic standards” for young children. Climate change is a subject
for adults with ample life experience, including experience observing the
political process. It’s not for children. Thunberg climate hysteria has no
place in the k-12 classroom. That would be educational malpractice. Teach kids
how to think. Later, as adults, they’ll be equipped to do their own research
and make their own conclusions about climate.
Kim Gaddy is half right. “Our youth” will have a
“next crisis” to deal with. But it won’t be climate change. If Gaddy and her
Thunberg fanatics get their way, the crisis our “future generation of
leaders” will have to deal with will be a return
to the days when humans had to face
the ever-present climate dangers without a modern, advanced, progressive
energy-driven free industrial economy.
Related Reading:
The
Hierarchy of Knowledge: The Most Neglected Issue in Education by Lisa
VanDamme for The
Objective Standard
Related Listening:
No comments:
Post a Comment