Following my posts about the inadequacy of the Royal Meteorological Society's definition of climate literacy, I received the following comment:
"My big problem with all this is that climate education is being deliberately narrowed, and climate change is being framed as a technical scientific problem that has technical scientific solutions. i.e. you get an A in ‘climate literacy’ when you understand the root causes of climate change to be the things listed on slide 6 of the RMetS survey. RMetsS / DfE are framing everything in that list as a root cause of climate change, which for me (with the exception of natural causes) is a gross mis-attribution of the root causes of climate change. Imagine if students were given the option to attribute climate change to some of the following causes, that truly are at the root…:
- The historic and languishing ‘othering’ of people of colour in the conscious and subconscious of the world’s most powerful politicians and business leaders.
- The lax regulation of ethically very dubious practices of advertising agencies whose job it is to create and sustain demand for highly polluting goods and services.
- The legally binding prioritisation of shareholder value by major corporate entities.
- The gradual but deliberate dilution of democracy.
- The normalisation of the class system and the myth of meritocracy.
- The reification of neoliberalism, individualism, globalisation, and consumerism."
The writer, whom I have known for years, wishes to remain anonymous lest their views cause the DfE, and others, perhaps, to look askance at bids for future funding (etc) for the organisation for which they work.
I'm posting these today, not because I necessarily agree with every aspect of what was said (I don't), but because such views need to be heard. And if such concern is widespread, maybe there's the need for a secret environmental educator channel somewhere.
I'll be saying more about what I actually think later on ...
Respond