Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Competing interest? | Main | Quote of the day »


There was quite a lot of interest in the quote by a teacher that I posted up yesterday. On a similar theme, here is something I've been sitting on for a while.

The Eco-schools movement is, as the name suggests, an environmental programme for children. The idea appears to be to have a green spin to as much of the curriculum as possible, but also getting children to raise money for green charities and to involve their families in green campaigning.

As schools develop their eco-programme, they rise through bronze and silver awards, arriving ultimately at the highest level of eco-school award, the Green Flag. To reach this level, greenery needs to be pervasive across the curriculum.

Green Flag

  • The school has a named individual responsible for environmental education/sustainable development education.
  • The school has a curriculum plan integrating a range of environmental issues into the curriculum across some year groups or classes in a range of subjects.
  • Aspects of Eco-Schools activities are integrated into a range of subjects across the curriculum for the majority of classes or year groups.
  • Issues surrounding sustainable development are explored through curriculum activities in many year groups.

This looks rather scary, but in fact if you look at the checklist for the awards it looks even worse. Schools are expected to complete this checklist annually, and it lists steps varying from the unexceptionable - Are windows and doors properly insulated and draught-free?- to the eyebrow-raising- Are the school grounds free of herbicides and pesticides? - to the downright terrifying - Does the school have an ethos of 'respecting and caring for other living things'? Have pupils made the link between Fair Trade and Environmental Protection? Are pupils aware of the importance of the conservation worldwide of natural habitats, resources and cultures? Does the school deliver programmes supporting 'sustainable communities'? Is the school taking part in the UNICEF 'Rights Respecting Schools' initiative? Have pupils investigated the potential impact of Climate Change on the lives of people across the globe? Is the school a 'Fair Trade School'? Has the school supported any global environmental charities? Are Eco-Schools activities included in the School Improvement/Development Plan? Does the school invite the local community to participate in its Eco-Schools activities, such as Eco 'Days of Action'? Are Eco-Schools activities integrated into the school curriculum?

That last bit is quite interesting. As the notes on the Green Flag award make clear, eco-activities are intended to be widespread in the curriculum and the Eco-schools Scotland website has curriculum maps showing how this can be achieved. This again looks rather scary, with the objectives of the curriculum pushed aside in favour of delivering the rather Maoist-sounding "Seven Objectives" of the Eco-schools programme. Science lessons, for example, will look at issues such as biodiversity ("I can debate the moral and ethical issues associated with some controversial biological procedures"), with a suggested focus on GM crops and cloning. Geography is a thing of the past in Scotland, with the subject now subsumed into the rather nebulous area of "People, Place and Environment". Here, one suggestion is that the objective might be "Having evaluated the role of agriculture in the production of food and raw material, I can draw reasoned conclusions about the environmental impacts and sustainability."

You get the idea. Take a look at the curriculum maps. They are amazing. Level 1, 2, 3, 4.

Oh yes, in Scotland the vast majority of schools are eco-schools.


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (55)

That is a truly frightening indoctrination.

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:13 AM | Unregistered CommenterHaroldW

Do the governors get a say in whether this crap is used in their schools?

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

Would anybody be surprised to know that the UK arm is apparently registered as a company in Norwich?

Apart from St. Delia being caught gloriously pissed in charge of a football club, that fine city is getting a bad rep recently..........

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:24 AM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

You know Bish, today I had a wander around the articles in the D.M. and D.T. today, reading about the UK's current bout of what now is generally called Global Warming Detritus and the inability off various councils etc to keep roads etc cleared. A lot of the comments were of the "What has gone wrong with this country".

The Eco bable above is typical of the garbage that dragged the country I was proud to have been born in, into the gutter. I left with a heavy heart some time ago and both my grown up children and my one grandson now also live abroad. After reading your last post, I can simply say I am glad my Grandson is growing up bi-lingual and is not being taught (indoctrinated?) in what once was a good education
system. Very sad!

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterPete Hayes

Obviously they want the youth to hit out at those nasty deniers, big oil, economic growth and all those evil things.

They need a name for their new movement The Hit Youth doesn't sound quite right - they are only kids after all.

Perhaps The Hitler Youth?

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby

Why, oh why, am I not surprised that a Danish school takes first place?! I went to one where we had to tie-dye our parent’s T-shirts, learn languages by role playing and every Christmas I was made to sell Unicef cards to hapless strangers coming out from the supermarket. My parents finally saw sense and moved me to a proper school but I think it may still have affected me :o)

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterH

This is truly horrific indoctrination, not education.

I note the maps are produced by ENCAMS

ENCAMS stands for Environmental Campaigns and is the environmental charity which runs the Keep Britain Tidy campaign and aims to achieve litter free, sustainable, environments, working with community groups, local authorities, businesses, and other partners ENCAMS also help to improve local environments by changing the attitudes and behaviour of the general public through national campaigns

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

"eco-schools"+"agenda 21" gets 8,830 results if Googled,

"The United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 - 2014), for which UNESCO is the lead agency, seeks to integrate the principles, values and practices of sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning, in order to address the social economic and cultural and environmental problems we face in the 21st Century' - UNESCO Education for sustainable development.

Note "all aspects of education and learning," More on "lifelong learning for all - cradle to grave" from a Scottish perspective here:

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterSheila

" In the infancy of societies, the chiefs of the state shape its institutions; later the institutions shape the chiefs of state" Baron De montesquieu.

This type of programming is ominous.Schools are now dangerous places for children to be. I am grateful that my children are no longer in the system. All though i no not what, something has to be done to stop this insidious activity before it is too late.

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:30 AM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

Yet another sign that CAGW movement is a religious movement. Is it not enough that so many kids get their heads twisted in religious schools? No, the CAGW cult must follow suit.

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:44 AM | Unregistered CommentersHx


1) Does she love children?
Of course! She finds them irresistably explodable.

2) Why does her breasts droop and sag so much?
Because there’s no pressure.

3) Does she like video games?
If you push her red button, she’ll twiddle your joystick, if you know what I mean.

4) Will she be a good lover?
Yes, definitely a 10:10 in bed! She’ll give you the best blow-up job you’ll ever get.

5) Is she a steady, mature type of gal?
Don’t expect too much, she’s at the age of stupid.

6) What if our dating activities are too carbon intensive? Will she get mad?
That’s OK, she’ll offset it by killing you.

7) How can I know whether or not we are right for each other?
Well, if you’re a squirrel, it will work out fine! Because she’s nuts.

8) Will she forever remain faithful to me?

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterWatermelon Spy said

On a brighter note, my friend's son, Jake (13), completed a global warming class at school, a couple of weeks back. It was given by his English teacher. The kids were asked to collect pamphlets and articles relating to global warming, and bring them to class for discussion. The discussion spanned a couple of class "periods". Naturally I was all over this event like a rash.

I asked Jake what the net result was, any conclusions drawn etc. With the teacher's guidance, the kids concluded that global warming IS real (CO2 does has a warming effect), but that the threat of catastrophe as a result of anthropogenic CO2 was likely to be minimal or non-existent.

What I don't know is if the class was a personal project by the English teacher in giving kids some critical skills in interpreting hype and rhetoric but, if so, it sounds like it was a bit of inspired teaching.

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterSimon Hopkinson

A lot of us said that 'biodiversity' was going to the next "thing" for the eco-fascists. This would seem to fit quite nicely into that plot.
A lot of it is probably soundly-based but it's mindless. I don't like herbicides and pesticides any more than the next man and use them with some reluctance in my own garden. Perhaps it would also be a good idea if LAs didn't reach for the Round-up as a first choice. But just making your grounds free of these things without any consideration of the reasons or the options is typical of the eco-loons for whom anything "chemical" is automatically suspect.
I'm afraid the Scottish LAs have bought into the "lifelong learning" mantra in a big way and they will be devotees of this madness, as Your Grace is probably aware.
Regrettably I'm with Pete Hayes. My father gave his life for this country and in my declining years I, like Pete, have done a runner with not a little regret.
I doubt that it is possible to escape the climate change idiocy until that particular house of cards comes tumbling down but I refuse to be bullied and straitjacketed by the con artists that are being allowed to run loose in the UK.
What has happened, Pete, is that since the early 60s (and I saw this coming when I was training to be a teacher) we have replaced decent education with political activism by teachers, a deliberate (apparently) policy of not educating either those who are difficult to teach or those who might make a success of their lives and the end result is a docile lumpenproletariat who can't think because they don't know how and are ideal fodder for every enviro-nut around.
I would lead the charge but I'm too old. All I can do is snipe from the sidelines unfortunately!

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterSam the Skeptic


Dec 1, 2010 at 11:02 AM | Unregistered Commentergeronimo

and six million kids are being indoctrinated as we speak.

Eco-Schools is one of the programmes of the Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE – and, as such, it is implemented through FEE Member organizations (one per country). Currently, the Programme is being implemented in 44 countries around the world, involving 25,000 schools, 6,000,000 students, 400,000 teachers and 4,000 local authorities.

Dec 1, 2010 at 11:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterBill

Education = teaching children how to think.
Indoctrination = teaching children what to think.
The word "Education" is now a misnomer.

Dec 1, 2010 at 11:18 AM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

One of the great problems in Western education is the infiltration of it by the Marxists; it has taken many years for this to become obvious, but now one only has to look at how the Science curriculum has been 'dumbed down' and the important set of scientific process skills sidelined, along with teaching kids how to use their critical faculties. The rise of subjects such as 'Environmental Studies' has aided this and the nett result is that young adults and kids from a large part of the earth's population are sleepwalking into becoming willing idiots for the Marxists. I would rather that young people were given an education based on the first principles of whatever it is they are studying, but now, if a topic doesn't begin with 'Eco', it is ignored or sidelined. It is beyond sad, It is criminal!

Dec 1, 2010 at 11:37 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlexander K

Things are not necessarily that bad. Remember how good 'real' teachers and children are at subverting the clearly crazy. At our local high school the Al Gore film was shown (and discussed) one week, the following they showed the C4 film, and discussed that. Most of the teens I meet are pretty wary of anyone with a 'message' and take it all with a pinch of salt. The phrase 'global warming' to refer to piles of snow is gaining quite a lot of currency, certainly around here, where we're up to our knees in the stuff.

Dec 1, 2010 at 11:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterCumbrian Lad

Does the new Education Secretary, Michael Gove, know about this?

t does not seem to be the sort of stuff that will bring you to his heart or a spring to his step........

Dec 1, 2010 at 11:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

This is worrying, but they are not the only group praying on children at school; just check out who sponsors books, sporting events and food supplies at most large schools. Now I have nothing against genuine attempts to educate and help children achieve a higher degree of critical thinking, but this does go over the line in terms of promoting self interested bodies and other authorities - the likelihood of educational bias on understanding the environment and how we relate to it is high.

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterKeith

The notes tell the teachers exactly what indoctrination the children need for each subject area. This is in italics.

One sample from stage three:

SOC 3-19a
(People in society, economy and business)
I can describe how the interdependence of countries affects levels of development, considering the effects on people’s lives.

*** payload: ("Control of fossil fuels, politics, wars…")

One from stage four:

Development of beliefs and values
I can apply philosophical enquiry to explore questions or ethical issues

*** payload: (Pupils may investigate 'unfairness' of the impact of Climate Change on developing countries, exploited by the Developed World, etc)

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterA.

Following this back to its parent organisation, the Foundation for Environmental Education - this turns out to be a ninternational organisation which is very quiet abiout its funding except that members have to be "non governmental organisations". "N"GOs routinely turn out to be government funded organisations. In this case one of its board turns out to be the boss of "Keep Scotland Beautiful" a charity which, again, makes no mentionn of who funds it but is sufficiently well funded that its site has an entry for jobs but not one for donations. A sure sign of a government fakecharity.

So yet again these ecofascists appear to be nothing but a state propaganda organisation. Is there anybody in the ecofascist movement who isn't a government parasite?

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterNeil Craig

And when they grow up, they'll be able to come up with classic watermelon quotes like this-

I was told by everyone that real fur was the only sensible solution, but I did not want to be responsible for the death of an Arctic Fox or a rabbit and, frankly, the real fur hats were very expensive, so I decided to go for fake fur.

This caused snorts of derision from the government guide who was accompanying me. He looked at me with a mixture of pity and contempt.

"Huh, Greenpeace," he said.

Assuming the guide wasnt suggesting he trap, skin and dress his own fox or rabbit, so not sure why he'd feel responsible. Wearing real fur in our mild cold weather would be a controversial fashion statement, wearing it in -30 to -60 conditions is sensible.

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

And they wonder why home education is increasing so rapidly? I'm not exposong my kids to this crap without ensuring they're equipped to think critically, and fully empowered to tell the teachers when they're being lied to.

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterSayNoToFearmongers

I can confirm that the whole syllabus has been infiltrated with this nonsense:

Climate change
Fair trade

These are all political campaigns and have no place in a school - whether you agree with them or not.

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes

This is a very organised campaign...

Down in Wiltshire,, UK - they've got bold enough to announce their activity via press releases to the local rag. What is dark and disturbing about their agenda is that they don't want to actually expose their agenda - the words "green" , "eco" and "recycling" seem to be enough as far as they are concerned to anoint the endeavour with respectability.

"Poems against global warming" seem to be a popular theme too - so the English teachers can get on board too - as someone else mentioned.

Dec 1, 2010 at 12:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterTom

"a Danish school takes first place"

That would be the Denmark where the wholesale massacre of dolphins is a rite of passage and the factory-farming of pigs is a cornerstone of their economy? So much for 'respecting and caring for other living things'...

Dec 1, 2010 at 2:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

I note that the checklist states: "You MUST carry out the Environmental Review annually". Who says so?

Dec 1, 2010 at 2:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Slightly tangential, but I went looking for 'golf-ball' bulbs yesterday to replace a couple of expired ones, and was unable to find any incandescent ones that were not in clear glass, even the halogen type. I like these, but the clear versions cast a hard shadow and since frosted ones appear now to be verboten by the EU, and the CFL versions are too large, feeble, expensive and make everything appear green (ha!) it looks like I shall have to invest in a bottle of hydrofluoric acid and etch my own...

I feel more like joining UKIP every day!

Dec 1, 2010 at 2:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

The curriculum maps are scary. They look as though they are meant to be the curriculum!

As for "I experience a sense of enjoyment and achievement when preparing simple healthy foods and drinks" I have to tell them that I get quite a kick out of making a decent chocolate fudge cake. Deep frying Mars bars is probably pretty satisfying, too.

Dec 1, 2010 at 3:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Hand-etched eyesight-friendly lightbulbs sounds like something you could sell on Guardian Environment. Just don’t throw the hydrofluoric acid down the sink.
Everybody else:
Calling Greens “Reds”, “Marxists”, or “Ecofascists” doesn’t help understanding, and understanding is what we need to counter horrors like this.
Environmentalism is an ideology, no doubt, and so like many -isms which have come and gone, has its roots in the “social unconscious” - the invisible workings of our society. The Marxisms and Fascisms which so marked the 20th century were born in violence, and gave rise to unspeakable horrors, but at least claimed a semblance of democratic legitimacy in being genuine mass movements. Environmentalism is none of these things, yet has achieved power in all our institutions, from political parties to primary schools, so that decent people now spit at the words “Oxfam” and “NGO”. How this happened is a mystery. I’m all for a rant to let off steam, but lets try a bit of reasoning with our ranting.

Dec 1, 2010 at 3:50 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

"That would be the Denmark where the wholesale massacre of dolphins is a rite of passage and the factory-farming of pigs is a cornerstone of their economy?" James P - Ouch! I don't know about the dolphins, I think you might mean seals?? Never mind, they both swim and look cute. True about the pigs though, although the meat mostly seems to be eaten by these strange British people :o) Anyway according to recent posts by Matt Ridley and Roger Pielke jr the wholesale massacre is conducted while we are almost bursting with happiness. Excellent news as I am going back to Denmark for Christmas and I have therefore according advised my family that I expect some serious jolliness on their part :o)

Dec 1, 2010 at 4:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterH

There are three powerful bodies whose remit enables this shocking politicisation of primary school children and they are the DCSF, QCA and Ofsted.

This from the Qualifications and Curriculum authority entitled: Sustainable Development in Action. A Curriculum Planning guide for schools. It can be found here:

In this document, the term “climate change” is referenced no less than 50 times in this 26 page eco-manifesto of indoctrination. It’s opening paragraph sets the tone:
“This guide helps you build sustainable development into the learning experience of all your learners. It provides a clear vision of why this work is important – from helping pupils to learn about the impact of their actions on the planet, to suggesting ways of building sustainability into the ethos and everyday running of your school.”

Worse still, the QCA make no bones about their involvement in driving an “embedded” syllabus:

Shamelessly marketed as “Developing Sustainable Schools: Driving forward and embedding sustainability for whole-school improvement”, this Orwellian proposal was endorsed by heads from the QCA, Ofsted and the Head of sustainable development at DCSF (Dept of Children, Schools and Families) to facilitate Agenda21 and its LA21 (local agenda) initiatives.

Not to be outdone by the QCA, here we have the DCSF’s very own “Climate Change in Schools” official release:

It’s my understanding that these institutions, from the DCSF downwards, under the protective umbrella of “ESD”, facilitate the deployment of pernicious propaganda entering the UK compulsory educational system by engaging NGO’s such as to act as delivery nodes for UNEP’s Agenda 21 and local council la21 (local agenda) initiatives, for their on-going campaign to drive environmental issues to the heart of primary education. This link between Agenda21, la21 and curriculum development in Geography is exemplified here:
And to quote from it:
“Geography plays a significant part in promoting sustainable development through…
developing pupils' knowledge and understanding of the concept of sustainable development and the skills to act upon this understanding (for example, as part of a Local Agenda 21 initiative)”

It seems to me that “embedding” a political agenda in the national curriculum is no different to coercion, blatant propagandizement, proselytising or subversion and I can only see a long road ahead trying to extricate this tangled mess of political manipulation and advocacy from our national curriculum because it has been woven in thread by thread, with no little deliberation by the government itself in deference to the UN and Agenda21. Furthermore, the quangos and organisations overseeing our national curriculum are clearly monitoring how well these embedded political initiatives are maturing:
“Despite the raising of the profile of education for sustainable development (ESD)
through the revision of the National Curriculum in 2000 and the launch of the
Sustainable Development Action Plan ... It is more evident and better organised in primary schools, where teachers are more used to working across a range of subjects.”
Read about it here:

Unfortunately “sustainable development” has been deployed at the apex of the educational pyramid, and this is the vehicle that climate change is hitching a ride on.

When Judith Curry claims the IPCC was “torquing the science”, is it possible that the science is not all that the United Nations are torquing when we see how their Agenda 21 is driving our education policies and indoctrinating future generations?

Agree with Sheila, UN Agenda21 is the driver.

Dec 1, 2010 at 4:20 PM | Unregistered Commenterjustin ert

@ geoffchambers

Strongly agree. Not many here are regulars over at Climate Resistance, which is a shame.

Dec 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Agreed. Climate Resistance has been quiet lately, but it’s always worth starting a discussion on their latest thread, for anyone who’s interested in trying to understand how we got to the absurd situation where our educational, energy, and industrial policy is being driven by a quasi-philosophical ideology with no democratic legitimacy. It’s tempting to talk of mass hysteria, cults, watermelons etc., but we’ll have to dig deeper than that to understand and defeat this pernicious movement.

Dec 1, 2010 at 5:07 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers


Good points.

But maybe "movement" is the wrong word - maybe "phenomenon" or "entity" or "trend" -r just "thing" are better nouns.
And maybe a range of strategies / tactics may be needed - everyone doing what they can at their own speed.

Dec 1, 2010 at 5:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Hughes

And of course, raising the school leaving age to 18 means even more time for indoctrination!
As far as i can tell children are still leaving school for all practical purposes as illiterate, and innumerate.
If this additional time was to be spent on teaching reading, writing and arithmetic it might be a good idea!

Dec 1, 2010 at 7:24 PM | Unregistered Commenterdave38

Geoff Chambers writes "Environmentalism is none of these things, yet has achieved power in all our institutions, from political parties to primary schools, so that decent people now spit at the words “Oxfam” and “NGO”. How this happened is a mystery."

In case this process is indeed a mystery for some readers of this blog, this is how it happens:
- A company with a strong social ethic and commitment to its local community hunts around for donation opportunities. In this case, "education" and "the next generation" are personal priorities for the CEO.
- Helping local schools become more energy efficient, hence reducing the local tax bills, feeds back directly to all employees, and for an engineering-intensive company energy efficiency seems a good type of extra-curricular project for enriching students' learning environment.
- The company PR and Environmental staff hunt around for good fits. They find a program developed and administered by a well-known NGO. The high level objectives seem great - e.g. from above: "Issues surrounding sustainable development are explored through curriculum activities in many year groups." "I can apply philosophical enquiry to explore questions or ethical issues". Definitely a skill set I want my child to develop.
- The company environmental manager knows the executive director of the NGO, from mutual participation on the boards of a couple of organizations, and has probably broken bread with him perhaps during a regulatory hearing or two; he can vouch for the integrity of the organization.
- The company funds delivery of the schools enhancement program into that company's home town (and so it spreads).
- The NGO hires a bright eyed, bushy-tailed recent convert to the dogma, who compiles a checklist of value-loaded, science-thin activities and constraints by trawling the web sites of more extreme groups, and it all makes sense to her board of directors.
- The company environmental guy says "oh my goodness", and alerts the PR department, but has no formal mechanism to influence the details of the program design.
- The company environmental guy and PR guy resign themselves, well, how bad can some idealism be for the kids, and mutual decide not to go back to the company CEO to recommend bailing out.

And so it goes.

Dec 1, 2010 at 8:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterBruce Friesen

Climate Resistance? Wow! Never heard of that blog before.

Their choice of the word 'resistance' suggests left-wing affiliation, and their 16-point statement is likely to please this left-winger for sometime. Without further ado, here is what they are:

1. There is good scientific evidence that human activities are influencing the climate. But evidence is not fact, and neither evidence nor fact speak for themselves.

2. The evidence for anthropogenic climate change is neither as strong nor as demanding of action as is widely claimed.

3. Our ability to mitigate, let alone reverse any such change through reductions in CO2 emissions is even less certain, and may itself be harmful.

4. The scientific consensus on climate change as widely reported inaccurately reflects the true state of scientific knowledge.

5. How society should proceed in the face of a changing climate is the business of politics not science.

6. Political arguments about climate change are routinely mistaken for scientific ones. Environmentalism uses science as a fig leaf to hide an embarrassment of blind faith and bad politics.

7. Science is increasingly expected to provide moral certainty in morally uncertain times.

8. The IPCC is principally a political organisation.

9. The current emphasis on mitigation strategies is impeding society’s ability to adapt to a changing climate, whatever its cause.

10. The public remain unconvinced that mitigation is in their best interests. Few people have really bought into Environmentalism, but few people object vehemently to it. Most people are slightly irritated by it.

11. And yet climate change policies go unchallenged by opposition parties.

12. Environmentalism is a political ideology, yet it has never been tested democratically.

13. Widespread disengagement from politics means that politicians have had to seek new ways to connect with the public. Exaggerated environmental concern is merely serving to provide direction for directionless politics.

14. Environmentalism is not the reincarnation of socialism, communism or Marxism. It is being embraced by the old Right and Left alike. Similarly, climate change scepticism is not the exclusive domain of the conservative Right.

15. Environmentalism will be worse for the poor than climate change.

16. Environmentalism is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Hear! Hear!

Dec 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM | Unregistered CommentersHx

- to the eyebrow-raising- Are the school grounds free of herbicides and pesticides?

well health of the kids does not seem too silly. Most herbicides and pesticides are actually toxic to humans as well.

- to the downright terrifying - Does the school have an ethos of 'respecting and caring for other living things'?

Now, I'm with you there, that is really twisted. We should be teaching our kids kill everything that moves without emotion. Train them up on Playstations so they may one day get a decent job with the US air force flying drones and blowing away "terrorists" and civilians from thousands of miles away . Give them a future;.

It would make much more sense to teach them how to use guns and napalm than this hippy fagot "respect" shit.

How can we expect them to accept exterminating 3/4 of the world population if we indoctrinate them to "care for other lifeforms".

My eyebrows are both raised at this stage.

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:09 PM | Unregistered Commenterprimrose

Bruce Friesen
It’s many years since I moved in these circles, but your analysis sounds depressingly covincing. It’s a world where creating a positive corporate image and issuing mission statements is considered more important than actually making stuff people want to buy. Which, of course, fits in perfectly with an education system which considers having the right attitude more important than learning things. Missing from your account is any hint of an input from teachers or the education system at large. Is this really happening? How come nobody told us?

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:12 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

@ geoffchambers
"How this happened is a mystery."

I believe it to be a failure of the 4th estate. The rise of the blog has similarities with pamphleteering in the mid 17th century made possible by Gutenberg's moveable type and desirable because of the failure of the press to be impartial. The internet being the new technology nowadays.

Then it was the stranglehold on the press of Charles I. Perhaps we are gearing up for Charles lll?

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:24 PM | Unregistered Commentersimpleseekeraftertruth


Then it was the stranglehold on the press of Charles I. Perhaps we are gearing up for Charles lll? :-(

Did you have to? I was in quite a good mood until you reminded me about this ;-)

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:30 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Primrose, you are very excitable.

You say "Most herbicides and pesticides are actually toxic to humans as well." The side of my bottle of Roundup says that children and animals do not need to be excluded from the area treated. This suggests that it is not toxic at all, at least not in the way that normal people use the term.

After that, you are just ranting. Do you respect and care for bacteria? Viruses? Turnips?

Primrose, just how much do you care for savoy cabbages?

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:45 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity. … In the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the consciousness of society."

-Antonio Gramsci

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:50 PM | Unregistered Commenterandyscrase

Any reasonable person is likely to be concerned about degradation of the environment, and to want to support initiatives to improve it. Somehow though, decent and responsible impulses of this kind seem to have been highjacked in support of something altogether different. It's terrible, and leaves the original simple desire for a clean and healthy environment - not to speak of normal rational science - totally out in the cold. There needs to be a change in the Zeitgeist, so that a normal concern for nature can be expressed at the same time as a concern to see continuing development, trade and prosperity. Clearly there doesn't have to be an either-or, it is just that some people seem to have forgotten that it is possible to be realistic about these issues. It's easy to grind the teeth or swear when you hear about the like of eco-schools, but probably the only things to be done are to keep on arguing the case for reason in forums like this and CR, maybe let our MPs know how we feel, and hope that eventually good sense will prevail.

Dec 1, 2010 at 9:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhilip

I know it’s only irony, but it’s misplaced. No-one is opposed to 'respecting and caring for other living things' or advocating using herbicides and pesticides in school playing fields. But these aims are all being attached to something called “sustainability” - a vague moral injunction linked to some higher scientific truths about the effects of a trace gas on the future of our planet. Failure to obey the moral edicts issuing from these higher truths will (we are told) result in the destruction of our planet. This is the philosophical underpinning of the ethos of 'respecting and caring for other living things' and a hundred other banalities in these documents.
These and similar banalities can be found in the literature of scientology, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and probably Jim Jones’s People’s Temple for all I know. The fact that this pseudo-scientific cult material is shaping the country’s eduacation system is deeply shocking, however acceptable some of the propositions may be in isolation.

Dec 1, 2010 at 10:00 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

Geoff: educational program development without "any hint of input from teachers or the education system at large. Is this really happening?"

I'll bite, and tell you what you almost certainly already know: With respect to programs developed by ENGOs, funded by corporations:
- First, our bright eyed young ENGO staffer doing the grunt work is almost certainly a recent graduate of teachers' college, an educational professional, you know, fully imbued with the world vision of the academics under which he or she studied, too young to be conservative.
- Second, the ENGO developing the program would almost certainly craft a lesson plan steering committee. There would be a rep from the teachers union, appointed by the self-selected group of people serving as the union environmental committee, and from amongst those would be the one who put up their hand for this duty. The corporate rep would be carefully selected, by the ENGO, from the ranks of environmental professionals working within the funding companies. Should that corporate rep, with one eye on the next ranking of his or her corporation by the ENGO community, raise a minor point, they would be Primrosed "how can you support poisoning of our school children?" and would reply "well mumble mumble gyphosate mumble mumble perhaps not so terrible mumble mumble perhaps we could replace the word "decimate" with the word "centimate"? And so forth.
- Third, when the educational professionals, working hard on the frontline, who certainly have my respect, see the big box roll in from the ENGO with the lesson plans and research resources and classroom activity kits, well, it is pretty tempting to go with the flow. After all, was not that box endorsed by the school administration? And touted in the most recent Corporate Social Responsibility report from local mega-company-x to the community?

I am too young to be so cynical, but there you have it.

Dec 2, 2010 at 2:35 AM | Unregistered CommenterBruce Friesen

Bruce Friesen
No I don’t know all this, because I haven’t lived in England for over 20 years. But I bet lots who do live there don’t know it either.
The problem seems to be similar to many other horrors of the Blair era. The left won’t reveal what’s happening because it’s the action of “their” party, and the right won’t go against the corporate flow, especially now they’re on the gravy train.
It’s not sexy enough for Wikileaks, and too technical for the Mail. Only the public is interested, i.e. no-one that matters.

Dec 2, 2010 at 5:27 AM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

You say "Most herbicides and pesticides are actually toxic to humans as well." The side of my bottle of Roundup says that children and animals do not need to be excluded from the area treated. This suggests that it is not toxic at all, at least not in the way that normal people use the term.

After that, you are just ranting. Do you respect and care for bacteria? Viruses? Turnips?

So you have one example , that is not contradictory to my statement. You fail to prove anything except you own lack of logic.

Interesting that you chose Roundup as your example. You should inform youself on how Monsanto are locking Indian farmers into using their GM roundup resistant grain under a licence that forbids them to keep back seed grain for next year. Their aim is to enslave the continent (and the world) by controlling food production. But they are not marxists.

The typical right wing ranting about marxists taking over seems to blind some people from the fact it is international corporations and banks that are now giving the orders to our elected governments and conning us out of hundreds of BILLIONS of pounds/dollars/euros at a time. They are also behind the climate cons of carbon trading and emission controls.

These guys are not democratic for sure, but they are not commies.

Yes , I do respect bacteria etc. There are millions of bacteria in my gut that are an essential part of my digestive process. They are an essential part of life on Earth without which we'd be neck deep in our own shit. That does not mean I value their life more than my own but yes I respect their place in nature. Your example attempts ridicule by parody but fails.

Describing an ethos of respecting and caring for other living things as "downright terrifying" is downright stupid.

Do you even read back what you've written before posting?

I agree with you that this kind of indoctrination in schools is toxic but the bits you chose to highlight were probably the most reasonable part. You also seem to totally misunderstand who is behind all this.

Preoccupying a generation with climate hysteria is sand in our eyes while they flease our economies and dismantle our democracy.

The soft left , eco minded campaigners are just the dupes doing their leg work.

Dec 2, 2010 at 9:18 AM | Unregistered CommenterPrimrose

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>