As a child, I protested against the cross-breeds and knew the buggers well, in the middle of Cold War times, how unwise the arms race was.Two camps that could destroy the world a few times. Atomic weapons in the Netherlands and Belgium, bluff and threat from both sides. The world that after a few times on a hair has escaped an atomic incident. I still stand behind those protests from then on. Just as for the climate marches, which are equally going to reduce the chance of wars. Droughts and population removals by climate warming in the most dangerous areas on earth with nuclear nations on all sides. A child can understand how dangerous that is.
It’s a sad country where your schoolchildren should be on the streets because they are worried.
The criterion of ‘ seeing through all the implications ‘ seems to me nonsense.In the whole missile debate or Ukraine debate or climate debate, there are few that are in detail. What is at issue is that these children express their concern-and I believe they have a point. I take them very seriously. The posturing about ‘ the possible implications ‘ does not detract from their point at all and seems to be a faint adult strategy to mask lax or indifference.
Raised in a politically turbulent country I was already young politically conscious from my family background, the version that my father adhered to: against exploitation, for cooperation, to help one another, solidarity, this vision was cruel in 1965 to the ground after a Failed coup d’etat in the aftermath of which between 500.000 to 3 million usually innocent without form can process massively over the course of a year were overlaid, time to leave, thus pass.My wife at all, her parents were not in politics interested.
But begrrep I really?Think not, an ideal is often far from reality, as I should have already viewed at that time: abuse of power and nepotism can be found everywhere, unfortunately. The story from the other side I rarely got to hear.
It will be just like with our idealistic schoolchildren, although in this case the arguments for much more strongly keep appearing to be Dar who opposed it, yet I doubt that it has made them clear what the consequences of a radical choice for “green” economic and Socially, I think not, so difficult to get a nuanced view, yet difficult for most young people who still have to develop that abstracting capacity.
Yes, they understand this fine.I was taught about climate change in the bridge class. With the consequences for animals (especially insects), our coastline, geopolitics, etc. I don’t see why the current teenagers haven’t gotten that information or have searched for themselves.
The consequences are all the greater for your life, the younger you are.Do adults understand that you must have at least a functioning natural balance for money and thus protect the climate to defend your interests? Apparently, the present young people must bring this to us, because the rulers do not want to ‘ walk too far for the group ‘, they prefer to be the vieste boy from the classroom.
Formulating the implications is a beautiful mind-exercise.Sometimes, if it doesn’t really convince us, they might be right!
In my childhood it was so. But we don’t do it often, right.
Are we now becoming old, better at it?
In Belgium, we have the example of a 17-year-old who suddenly began to truancy because the government continues to refuse to take responsibility in terms of air and other pollution.
This protest has received such an unexpectedly large trailer that, in the end, in addition to thousands of other high school pupils, groups of Universitaries and college students joined.
This success has resulted in a counter-movement that has caused her to be young to know what she is about.And I do not understand that.
When it comes to the environment, it is clear that Governments give priority to the economy.Then you should be weak or evil if you condemn her on the basis of her age, while she is in excess of the same.
Who is now against a cleaner air and a clean industry?Economic consequences are also involved. These problems are also being solved. The priorities in the name of the sacred economy disturb me very much, just like the fear people are trying to talk to.
No not always.
Often it is just the chaos and the group pressure that attracts children.And in fact, especially to miss as many lessons as possible.
Have a nice example of this.
Because when I was in high school, the news showed that schools were obliged to teach 1040 hours.
Every school went to protest and it was quite out of hand at some schools.
With me at school there was also a huge chaos.And I can remember how excited I was about the protest. I knew exactly no nut, but I quickly cycled to the Albert Heijn with some friends to buy eggs.
We return with the eggs and we start throwing, suddenly my director comes out.I hide the eggs under a bench. I had a good relationship with the director and he came to me immediately. He asked me if I also participated in the protest. I quickly lied that I was “just” outside to see what was going on.
He says “Well beautiful, and have you found out?”I confessed that I didn’t know what the protest was about and then he explained about those 1040 compulsory school hours.
He literally tells me: “It doesn’t strike this protest, because we have been maintaining this 1040 hours norm for years”
Jaaa who felt I didn’t arrive and afterwards it was a laughing stock.
But is a good example that children often protest, but also often do not know why.
It is usually protested because the opinions of people who have a problem are not heard well by politics.
And there are people who understand better than we have the implications of certain decisions, and especially young people can change the opinions they are accustomed to when there are marks that things need to be different.
Yes and No.They try to understand, but are not “wise” (clever, do not assign) enough to view and understand an aspect of all sides. They see everything as black or white. Sometimes it’s just grey, but that comes with time.