A blog sharing information about materials presented to children on climate, highlighting those intended to frighten or mislead, and those which seek to inform and inspire rather than to recruit, even the very young, for an ill-founded political campaign around the threat of CAGW. A campaign which is irresponsible, destructive, divisive, and degrading.
'Climate fearmongers, you've become some of the most dishonest as well as useless people in the Earth's history.' Luboš Motl, 2018
“The indoctrination of
high school students as a directive of the UN’s Agenda 21 and common core
global education standards has shown up in New Zealand exam papers.”
Thus writes Ian Wishart* in an article
published last week on the NZ website Investigate Daily. He continues:
“Two exam papers from different
students in the 2008 year are clearly wrong on the facts, but nonetheless
gained “Excellence” in New Zealand’s National Certificate of Educational
Achievement (NCEA) exams and are paraded on the Ministry of Education website as
“exemplars” to measure up to.
The two exams show children were
brainwashed with inaccurate information on New Zealand history, and
caricatures of modern worldviews reflecting curriculum bias.
One of the questions required the pupil to compare
and contrast ‘capitalist’ with ‘indigenous’ world views.A caricature of each seems to have been taught
to the pupils, and these caricatures are admired in the examples.
Now, given that capitalism has led to the most
dramatic improvements ever in the quality of life of people (e.g. with respect to
air, water, food, and shelter quality), of domesticated animals (modern
husbandry practices), and indeed to great strides forward in helping conserve
wild animals and wild lands, and that primitive lifestyles have made no such
progress, you would be astonished to learn that remarks such as the following
seem to have received high marks in these New Zealand exams:
‘[The capitalist world
view] is that the economy, society and the environment are in no way connected
and therefore not affecting one another.”
‘[The indigenous world
view is that] the environment, society and economy are linked and each
individually important and highly significant to the other.’.
capitalists behaviour is to live in the present, with little reverence of
interest in their ancestory [sic] and their traditions are selectively upheld.’
‘The indigenous people
place a lot of emphasise [sic] on tradition and pass it on orally through
generations so their history is ‘alive’.
This benefits these later generations significantly as they can learn
skills such as hunting, fishing and harvesting.’
‘The capitalists practise
exploitation against [sic] the environment.
They are production and resource based.
They use the natural resources of the land to turn a profit.. When the resources in that particular area
are used up they simply move on, destroying that land for future generations.’
‘The indigenous people
work in harmony with the land. They act
as stewards of the land, without enforcing their power over it as they are spiritually
connected to it. They practise subsistence
production, taking enough and no more from the land.’
Now this simplistic romanticisation of ‘indigenous’
societies and equally simplistic demonisation of ‘capitalist’ societies is so widespread, that the
poor teachers and pupils can scarcely be blamed for replicating it. Yet where is the success? Where are people healthier, better fed,
better sheltered, and so on? Where do
people live longer? Where are slash and
burn agricultural practices most discouraged?
Where is air quality, indoors and out, higher? Where is environmental
improvement and conservation more strongly supported?
The gross simplifications are of course part and parcel of the promotion of 'sustainable development' - a notion that would be more informatively described as 'suppressed development'.
It would be better if both pupils and teachers
were less dogmatic here. Capitalism is
at heart, the simple matter of free trading amongst individuals and
communities, and the accumulation of surpluses with which to try for more and
better things. As Adam Smith pointed out
long ago, the pursuit of individual self-interest that this seems to imply is
highly conducive to societal improvement.
Others have noted that this also thrives best under conditions of
intellectual and political freedom.
To merely disparage one caricature, and look at the other through
rose-tinted spectacles is not good for education. Good for indoctrination though. Perhaps essential for that.
*Ian WIshart has just published a book called ‘Totalitaria’:
‘An explosive new book says the United Nations has rolled out a global
education policy designed to indoctrinate children to accept a planned world
Revelations are made in the new book “Totalitaria:
What If The Enemy Is The State?” by award-winning investigative journalist and
bestselling author Ian Wishart.
The book reveals the policy is part of Agenda 21 and
also the UN’s world education curriculum, and it has been implemented in New Zealand as part of NCEA national standards
and will underpin the controversial “Common Core” education standards in the USA.
Journalist Ian Wishart says the agenda actually
stretches back almost to the inception of the United Nations:
“Back in the 1950s the top officials in the United
Nations came up with a very long term plan to change the world to accept a
global ruler. They felt the only way to bring world peace was to bring in some
form of global government based on new spiritual values of peace and love. In
the book I quote the UN officials and their documents on this.
“They figured out the most strategic way to force this
change was to build up public fear about different world problems, so that
eventually people would practically beg for global government – which, of
course, the UN was perfectly placed to provide.”
Among the crisis opportunities they seized on was
[Note added later: I've skimmed through the Kindle edition, and I must warn readers that it is a rather frantic, lively account of Lucifer-worshipping people of influence in the UN and elsewhere. That makes it a bit hard to take seriously, but it does contain a lot of information as well as provocative comments.]