I witnessed something sobering the other day. I was in attendance as a presentation was being given to a 6th grade audience, the specific topic being irrelevant, but when giving an example to them, the speaker asked for a show of hands "How many of you would prefer to own a gasoline powered vehicle?" and maybe 5-10% raised their hands. When asked how many would prefer a hybrid or electric vehicle, ALL THE REST raised their hands.
Now, what bothered me about this was that as 6th graders, it's quite obvious that the vast majority of them would have no real frame of reference based on personal knowledge and experience to be so decidedly showing such a preference. Having witnessed the car line for this school, the vast majority of their parents drive gasoline powered vehicles, some drinking enough gas for two or three of the others. The conclusion I have drawn (I've taken science and statistic classes, so y'all can trust me!) is that the indoctrination by repetition is working on these youngsters. With no real arguments being presented to them from any other side, anything put forward to them in their textbooks and class presentations about "go green" or "save our planet" and "wind and solar" will take root deeply. It won't be too many more election cycles before they're out there voting.
It's not that I'm against any sensible advances in technology and energy, it's just that I'm not an alarmist, I don't go for the Chicken Little antics that are pushed so heavily. I also don't go for pushing agendas on kids, but it's a favored tactic.
I shudder to think how many hands would have gone up for what options if firearms were discussed, but I'm pretty sure it would have been heavy to the "guns bad" side of the scale. When my step-son was in high school, I perused his Civics textbook (they still taught Civics then) and noticed some things that got me to thinking. They had the full text of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and further amendments, which was encouraging, but the section was bordered by sidebars and bullet-point summaries. When you think back to your school days, and studying from your textbook, how often did you read the actual text? Usually, you read the highlighted/underlined/italicized vocabulary words and definitions, the captions describing diagrams, and the summaries. Only if specifically assigned, or made to read out loud in class, did you read the full text, right? Textbooks are almost designed to skip the actual text. So in summarizing the Second Amendment, the brightly colored highlight sidebar said exactly five words - "States can have a militia."
I guess the ultimate point is, question what your kids are being taught, be mindful that you look at the homework whether they need help with it or not. Textbook companies mostly reflect the views of general academia which is very much slanted to the liberal end of the spectrum, and those impressionable minds will soak up whatever is foisted upon them and regurgitate it faithfully if not exposed to contrasting points of view and taught to think critically. That is an area where academia is drastically failing, maybe by plan.
Now, what bothered me about this was that as 6th graders, it's quite obvious that the vast majority of them would have no real frame of reference based on personal knowledge and experience to be so decidedly showing such a preference. Having witnessed the car line for this school, the vast majority of their parents drive gasoline powered vehicles, some drinking enough gas for two or three of the others. The conclusion I have drawn (I've taken science and statistic classes, so y'all can trust me!) is that the indoctrination by repetition is working on these youngsters. With no real arguments being presented to them from any other side, anything put forward to them in their textbooks and class presentations about "go green" or "save our planet" and "wind and solar" will take root deeply. It won't be too many more election cycles before they're out there voting.
It's not that I'm against any sensible advances in technology and energy, it's just that I'm not an alarmist, I don't go for the Chicken Little antics that are pushed so heavily. I also don't go for pushing agendas on kids, but it's a favored tactic.
I shudder to think how many hands would have gone up for what options if firearms were discussed, but I'm pretty sure it would have been heavy to the "guns bad" side of the scale. When my step-son was in high school, I perused his Civics textbook (they still taught Civics then) and noticed some things that got me to thinking. They had the full text of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and further amendments, which was encouraging, but the section was bordered by sidebars and bullet-point summaries. When you think back to your school days, and studying from your textbook, how often did you read the actual text? Usually, you read the highlighted/underlined/italicized vocabulary words and definitions, the captions describing diagrams, and the summaries. Only if specifically assigned, or made to read out loud in class, did you read the full text, right? Textbooks are almost designed to skip the actual text. So in summarizing the Second Amendment, the brightly colored highlight sidebar said exactly five words - "States can have a militia."
I guess the ultimate point is, question what your kids are being taught, be mindful that you look at the homework whether they need help with it or not. Textbook companies mostly reflect the views of general academia which is very much slanted to the liberal end of the spectrum, and those impressionable minds will soak up whatever is foisted upon them and regurgitate it faithfully if not exposed to contrasting points of view and taught to think critically. That is an area where academia is drastically failing, maybe by plan.