Fair enough. I know lots of people who feel the same as you!
Often itâs not about protest but more about what you will do to bring about your desired outcome. Children are massive consumers, toys are mostly plastic. The latest mobile phone maybe? New trainers or perhaps collectable models wrapped in plastic packaging, fast food the list is sizeable. I think if they mobilised as a cohort and said we will give up a, b, c for the environment this would be a positive. If the schools allow them time off from important study time then they should be fined.
1 Like
They donât generally buy those things themselves, do they. My children arenât and havenât been great consumers of plastic toys and I donât expect they are that exceptional, I am fairly aghast at the quantity of pens, sharpeners, plastic coatings on exercise books, that sort of thing.
I think they have a bigger stake in the future than any of us and if they shake a few old people out of their complacency then so much the better.
2 Likes
My point is that as consumers if children work to remove demand created by their appetites this might be more effective than protest. We must teach them that protest has value but so does behaviour change. Its not always about blaming somebody else. Consumption drives pollution. Itâs quite often bottom up rather than top down.
2 Likes
Interesting point. Itâs got to come from both sides though. Itâs been proven that children respond more to what their parents do than what they say.
And without significant top down action, well we are stuffed.
So children are buying gas-guzzler cars, plane tickets, cruises, not insulating their fuel-heated houses, doing up their house with synthetics, doing the packaged food and drinks shopping are they ???
Come off it.
1 Like
We must teach them the difference between being offended and being an agent of change. The latter requires a degree of ownership, acceptance to act and behaviour change. If you criticise others you must declare what you will do differently and then be held to account. Alternatively you can allow them to enjoy growing up without having to involve themselves in politics until they mature.
From the BBC "Danny, 14, said: âWhatâs the point in learning if itâs not going to do anything because your future is going to be ruined by climate change?â
3 Likes
So what would be your view Simon of, say, Rosa Parks, the black woman who broke the law by sitting in a bus seat reserved for white passengers - and helped inspire the civil rights movement in America that eventually changed such laws?
1 Like
Seriously Geof - you want me to draw some kind of analogy between abhorrent and institutionalised racism in the 1950âs and kids skipping school in 2019? Free education for children, paid for by tax payers. Should I add my views on children working up chimneys - would that help at all? They should be in school on a school day.
1 Like
Simon, I do understand what youâre saying but someone has to do something because current governments seem unwillingly to take the necessary steps right now to protect the planet for future generations, itâs also actually refreshing to witness the young getting involved in something positive.
3 Likes
Everyone can join inâŠ
The analogy works if your argument is that the kids should be in school simply because itâs the law, because you canât then consistently approve of other political actions that break the law. But, probably, you do! Thereâs a very long history of strikers breaking the law, and achieving very positive results for everybody by doing so.
I also think youâd be hard pressed to dismiss the analogy in other respects. Because kids donât really understand? - that black people were âlike childrenâ in this respect was precisely an argument of the racists! Because schooling is unconnected with environmental breakdown (and Parksâ action directly challenged racist laws)? - I donât agree, since schooling is really about preparing kids to live in the kind of civilisation we have known - but unless environmental disaster is averted that civilisation simply wonât be there for them. And in any case, Parksâ action wasnât really just about buses, was it?
I could go on! - the tax-payers argument? - it was mainly white people that paid tax in Alabama in Parksâ day! - etc⊠and by the way, kids do pay for education, since it enables them to become taxpayers - thatâs what it did for us! - the problem todayâs kids have is that if we carry on trashing the environment, there will be no tax, no education, nothing that schooling could prepare them for.
4 Likes
Then if you believe that teachers should take their in house training on non school days.
Working parents have to make arrangements for their children because they donât have the flexibility to choose the days on which they work.
I am not a user of emojis, so I will have to look out for that.
I donât use them because I feel that they are part of the dumbing down in the use of good language.
Just the one observation really Geof:
Yes - they were adults.
As for the rest of your post - it feels like youâre simply trying to create an off-topic argument (possibly with yourself?). Kids donât get to choose when they attend school - thatâs my point,⊠my only point.
1 Like
Why bring racism into this ??? Very off topic !
3 Likes
My 13 year old nephew has never set foot in a school. Heâs a well informed, educated lad who loves football and is very at ease with children and adults alike. He will be taking some gcseâs early.
My grandson who is 6 missed school a day here and there in his first year because my dil took every opportunity to visit her dying father 4 hours away.
Iâm not advocating parents treat childrenâs schooling like a pick and mix but the odd missed day really wonât do any harm unless the children are taking important exams.
David. I like your idea. Might be a problem to ask a three year old to give up on their plastic filled wish lists but older kids could make a stand. Maybe this is an idea that could grow.
2 Likes
Sorry, Simon, but I still donât see why you think my analogy is inappropriate or âoff-topicâ - by that logic any analogy however fitting and illuminating should be ignored.
There is absolutely no question here of kids simply choosing when they attend school - itâs that comparison that is off-topic - what theyâre doing is part of a world-wide political/environmental movement, with school strikes on certain days in over 100 countries!
1 Like
Geof
-
Couple of points before I âretireâ - I never said your analogy was inappropriate - your word not mine.
-
When you refer to school strikes - that could be misleading as youâre implying that teachers / admin staff etc are on strike as well. Not sure that is the case.
AFAIK itâs simply a case of kids choosing not to go to school and protest instead. Thatâs not on. Some may think the kids are being used.
Geof - this is getting a bit tiresome and well off the real issue of climate change - Iâve made my point so, unless youâre trying to âconvertâ me in some way, then letâs leave it there. Looks like weâre unlikely to agree.
1 Like