By Santiago Navajas
Image credit: Cine y Política
“Less tests and more activism” proclaimed the poster of a high school student in one of the demonstrations that accompany the student strike due to climate change. The idea of substituting classes for the streets and studying for protest comes from a Swedish teenager, Greta Thunberg, who has become so famous that she has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. One might think, however, that not only is there no contradiction between exams and activism but, on the contrary, the best a student could do is roll up their sleeves and start studying science and energy engineering to contribute to the emergence of an alternative energy system to the current, equally efficient but with less impact on the environment. For example, with more nuclear energy.
Thousands of young people systematically deceived by their teachers, environmental organizations and the media are really convinced that the world only has ten years left before climactic apocalypse. Faced with such a black perspective, who in his right mind would want to continue being a student when what they need are warriors against the Summer of CO2 like Jon Snow against the Winter of zombies.
Greta Thunberg’s hallucination, seeing the streets in flames, has moved with religious fervor and mass hysteria to young people seconded by the usual cheeks that point to any excuse to miss class. This alarmist, hysterical and oversized campaign has its media bastion in the British newspaper The Guardian, which openly proclaims that the term “climate change” is too objective and neutral for its purpose of emotional manipulation, which they call “awareness”, as well that they will use more forceful and hyperbolic terms like “climate crisis”. Now, I would recommend “CO2 Armageddon”.
It was Plato in the Republic who first justified that lies could be used in politics even when they are supposedly noble. That is to say, that for the sake of a higher end, miserable means can be used. Once scientific theory has been transformed into a scientistic religion by climatic changers, skeptics are treated as heretics, trying to deny them participation in the debate since it is not a matter of discussing hypotheses and verifying data but of implanting dogmas and make us commune with mill wheels.
Plato was the theoretician of the justification of the lie but Marxist Antonio Gramsci proposed the conversion lies in mass indoctrination through the educational system, to achieve a conceptual and emotional homogeneity. Gramsci defended, in front of those who tried to express the children’s own idiosyncrasies and their own thought, that “Renouncing the child means nothing but allowing his personality to develop chaotically welcoming the general environment all the reasons that have form your life. ” Where the Italian communist says “chaotically” he means “freely” and by “forming” he means “brainwashing”.
Regarding climate change, in a formation from Aristotelian criticism (the Greek philosopher argued that truth and justice would win in a free debate without the need to resort to the platonic bad arts) and not from Gramscian homogenization it would be to read authors who defend opposing views about the IPCC’s scientific data. Let them read, on the one hand, The Guardian and The New York Times, but also Bjorn Lomborg and Daoiz Velarde. Throw Vicente Lozano and Luis Gómez in the balance. That, of course, laws economic science as the Nobel Nordhaus for which the issue of climate change is not a matter of renewable white or coal black.
In short, we must encourage students to be really critical and educated, not to miss class or to change science for militancy. Especially not to be manipulated by those who confuse the task of the teacher with that of the priest or the propagandist. Less indoctrination, more education.
This article was published by Libertad.org on July 3rd, 2019. Reproduced on Political Hispanic with authorization from said source. Also translated by Political Hispanic.
Political Hispanic is not responsible for the content of opinion articles, each author being responsible for their own creations.