On March 20, a local climate activist used a Another Voice column to praise the actions of children “as young as 5” in a recent Buffalo climate protest.
This comes on the heels of the shameful episode of young grade schoolers advocating for the ridiculous “Green New Deal” before Sen. Dianne Feinstein while the accompanying adults stood by and let them do it. The children were, and are, being used as human climate change shields by adults who should know better.
Climate change advocates are finding that the general public is not responding to their warnings to the degree they wish. Citizens remain skeptical of science apparently based mostly on computer models.
They agree with the presidents’ Paris Climate Accord withdrawal. They question how and why a nation that’s responsible for only a small amount of the world carbon emissions can or should fix the entire planets’ problem.
In response, the climate change crowd has upped the rhetorical ante to using words like catastrophic, extinction, existential threat, and phrases like this generations’ World War II. They are also imparting this doomsday rhetorical nonsense on children in the hope that their sympathy inducing pleas will bring about the action they seek.
The climate activists, although a bit overdramatic, may or may not be correct on the issue. But dragging children into the argument is simply not right.
They should not have to grow up being told by adults that their lives will end in twelve years. They should not believe they will soon be extinct or are facing a World War II scenario. They should not be thinking (in the words of the Another Voice writer) “Why go to school if there is no future?”
Leave the climate change battle to the grown-ups. Even adults can’t spell or define “existential.” Children shouldn’t have to know how.