UK Advisory Group Advocates
Reporting Toddlers for “Racism”
|(Remnant News Watch for August 15, 2008 Issue)|
|REMNANT COLUMNIST, New York|
Toddlers should be “taught about racism and singled out for criticism if they have racist attitudes, a Government-funded advisory group said yesterday,” reports Steve Doughty of the Daily Mail, UK (July 7, 2008).
The National Children's Bureau (NCB), which describes itself as “an umbrella body for the children's sector,” has published a 366-page guide titled Young Children and Racial Justice which claims that “racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling-casual thoughtless comments, and peer group relationships”. It told nursery teachers, playgroup leaders and childminders to record and report every racist incident involving children as young as three. These could include saying 'Yuk' about unfamiliar food. Even babies should not be ignored in the hunt for racism because they can 'recognize different people in their lives', a new guide for nurseries and child care centres said.
In Young Children and Racial Justice, nursery and day-care workers are advised to report as many “racist” incidents as possible and are told that “No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist intent, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action.” These racist incidents include children using phrases like “those people” or “they smell.”
Child-care professionals are also urged to report children who “react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying ‘yuk’.”
According to Steve Doughty, the National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year (mostly through taxpayer-funded organizations), has lobbied for more sex education in schools and a legal ban on spanking by parents. The NCB also suggests “cultivating the home languages of new immigrants – despite Government anxiety to promote the learning of English.” Why? Because, claims the NCB, “English is now viewed as the major language of the world but this is not because it has any innate linguistic advantages – it is because English is the language of power in a world dominated by English-speaking peoples.”
Patricia Morgan, author and researcher on family life, is a critic of the NCB guide: “Stepping in to stop severe bullying is one thing, but this is interference in the lives of children,” she said. “It smacks of totalitarianism. It is regulation of private speech and thought. They intend nursery staff to step into children's playground squabbles and then report them to the local council as race incidents. Who would ever have thought that the anti-racism crusade would go so far?”
Does this sound like someone defending an unnecessary job? Is your average teacher, day-care worker or parent too stupid to differentiate between a child who is behaving foolishly and one who may have a genuine problem with hostility?
In “Racial Equality: Information for Early Years Workers,” a list of resources compiled by Jane Lane, one finds some interesting titles. These include Racism, Gender identities and Young Children; Playing Them False: A Study of Children’s Toys, Games and Puzzles; War, Conflict and Play; A Recipe for Change: Equality, Diversity and Food; and, of course, What if All the Kids are White?: Anti-bias/Multicultural Education with White Children.
Gender identities. Games and puzzles. Food. And those mean white kids. Very little is left out, as you can see. In fact, there is a type of mania which seems to animate the social-engineering elite. It resembles very much a social “germaphobia” – an overwhelming compulsion to “cleanse” society. The germaphobe is obsessed with the idea of “contamination,” and must constantly perform rituals (such as hand-washing) in order to keep himself antiseptic.
The social engineers are scandalized by and incapable of understanding human frailty. They deem aggression, “intolerance” and, ultimately, independent thought, as contaminants, things to be rooted out and ritually cleansed – over and over again, because they can never be satisfied with what they deem to be the imperfections of their fellow men. At the workplace, in churches, in schools, on the playground – no place is now safe from their compulsive “social hand-washing.”
A case in point is cited in the Daily Mail article, in which a 10-year-old boy was taken to court for calling an 11-year-old “Paki” and “Bin Laden.”
Even though the two boys made up and became friends again, the Crown Prosecution Service decided to prosecute after the mother of the “victim” lodged a complaint. The 10-year-old appeared at Salford Youth Court, where he was accused of violating the Public Order Act of using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior with intent to cause another person harm or distress. Fortunately, prosecutors decided not to pursue the case after District Judge Jonathan Finestein ordered them to review their decision. Finestein said, regarding the 10-year-old in question, “I shouldn't think he understands Bin Laden or Al Qaeda. I'm not condoning what he supposedly said but there must be other ways of dealing with this apart from criminal prosecution.”
Too many social service professionals (including the ubiquitous “child-protective services”) have created a pseudo-science whose ultimate aim is to judge the morally fit from the morally unfit. Where children are concerned, they have cast themselves in the combined roles of judge, jury and executioner, and all on the myth that their own agenda must be enforced at all cost – i.e., legally. Propagating the myth that parents, teachers and churches are incapable of providing proper moral guidance, the experts are creating a generation of neurotics, “social germaphobes” who will never rise above an infantile “words hurt” mentality.
Yes, children say “hurtful” things to one another. But the “words hurt” agenda is an enervating process which instills the “victim mentality” at a young age. What children should be taught, in addition to the fact that it is simply wrong to despise people because of their race, is that they can take the high ground and need never be the victims of mere words. In saner times, it was put this way: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Or is that too much common sense for the social engineers? Would it put them out of a job?
Sadly, the world is not always a “friendly” place. What would happen should the overly-delicate “words hurt” children, upon reaching adulthood, find themselves up against an aggressor who threatens their lives and nation?
ALSO IN THIS WEEK'S REMNANT...
- One of the Last Great
Men in the Modern World, RIP
Want More News?
Subscribe to The Remnant! For more information, please click here.