Sodden Trotskyite Dissent Over Gore
by Snarksmithy, 12 October 2007
Jura thinks Gore’s win is bollocks but he’s more troubled by the following:
In yesterday’s Guardian, David Adam reported on a court case brought by political activist and Kent school governor Stewart Dimmock, who objects to the government’s plan to show Gore’s film in secondary schools. The judge, Mr Justice Barton, refused to block the move, but criticised the film, and demanded that when it is presented in schools, the Department of Children, Schools and Families should make it clear that the film is not an impartial analysis of climate science. My own view is that An Inconvenient Truth is based largely on scientific fact, but this is embellished and distorted in the service of a personal political agenda. In the past I’ve objected to taxpayers’ money being spent on feeding this propaganda to British school students. I now accept that this battle is lost, and advocate that the film be accompanied by teacher-produced discussion notes that put Al Gore’s contribution to the climate change debate into political context.
The judge, I think, was right. But what text or film peddled by tax-funded schools to whatever nation’s children is not equally dubious? Try reading a U.S. high school civics book sometime and see if you don’t come away feeling that milk-and-cookies propaganda is not what it amounts to. P.J. O’Rourke, in his funny years, memorably flipped through one: “What U.S. president overcame a handicap to bravely lead our nation through one of its darkest hours?” P.J.: “Surprisingly, the answer wasn’t Ronald Reagan, his handicap being Nancy.”
Also, what Nobel laureate hasn’t overdone things a bit in light of a “personal political agenda”? A campaign undertaken with enough monomaniacal passion to qualify as a “crusade” — which is what Oslo typically honors — is surely driven by a personal political agenda. The 1997 Peace Prize recipient was a woman named Jody Williams. She won it for her relentless efforts to get land mines banned internationally. Question: Is a woman who devotes her life singularly to seeing a devastating and outmoded weapon enter the dustbin of history not putting top priority on something that is arguably not the most urgent crisis facing humanity? (AIDS kills more people per annum than land mines do.) Of course she is. Do I think global warming is a greater threat than the collected forces of theocratic fascism? No, I don’t.
But nor do I think that anyone who agrees with me in waging as merciless a war against Al Qaeda and company gives a good damn about a public relations bauble tied to “awareness” and “consciousness-raising.” Gore did what Nobel clearly prefers, so why not let him have his prize? Given the committee’s track record, can’t you think of other possible winners who would have made once again a complete farce of the whole proceeding?
Friday 12 October 2007 at 20:03
‘But nor do I think that anyone who agrees with me in waging as merciless a war against Al Qaeda and company gives a good damn about a public relations bauble tied to “awareness” and “consciousness-raising.”’
About that awareness and consciousness-raising…
Go to youtube and google “Ban Water Petition” and “Women’s Suffrage” petition and you’ll see lots of people aware with their consciousness fully erect — and not giving a damn about understanding what they care about, so long as they’re seen caring about it as much, if not more, than the next guy.
The problem is not that Gore got the Nobel prize for making a movie that strangly seems more about Al Gore than Climate Change, but that Awareness and Consciousness Raising is now called “good pedagogy” even when it’s pushing bad science, junk science or even good science (albeit without actually teaching the science since numbers always get in the way of caring and may lead to “skepticism”).
Sorry to rant but that’s a major education peeve of mine these days.
Friday 12 October 2007 at 20:13
All true, though I would venture to say that at least the debate has been brought to fore by Al’s self-aggrandizing work on the environment. For one thing, Bjorn Lumborg might not sell half as many books if it weren’t for An Inconvenient Truth, which, so far I can tell — and I’m below an amateur on the science of climate change — was an epic poem masquerading as a critical essay.
For every eco-weenie who’ll put a feather in his cap for “caring” more thanks to Al, there’s at least someone out there who’ll do some homework because his interest in the subject has been piqued. And even those who don’t do the homework but are still concerned enough to buy energy-saving light-bulbs, or fuel-efficient cars, etc. — if they choose to credit Gore, as many of them have done, who am I to take that away from them?
I should have added to my post that while there are scores of dubious recipients we should feel lucky the prize did not go to this year, there are still scores of deserving recipients we should feel shamed that it didn’t.
However, I begin to feel I’m overextending myself in behalf of a contest defined by the likes Henry Kissinger, Yasir Arafat and Jimmy Carter.
Friday 12 October 2007 at 20:20
I heard about one poor kid in Canada who had to sit thru the groaner of a movie 4 diffent times for four different teachers.
Friday 12 October 2007 at 22:01
The Nobel should have gone to Stompin Tom Connors for “Gumboot Cloggeroo” back in 1979 but it went to that cow Mother Theresa instead.
I’ve been bitter ever since.
Friday 12 October 2007 at 22:13
And the Order of Lenin to him for this one:
http://tinyurl.com/2sjmzo
Friday 12 October 2007 at 22:38
What Terry sez
Friday 12 October 2007 at 22:43
I see some of your point, Snark. But I don’t think that the call-to-activism:call-to-solid-learning that comes out of the movie is really 1:1. Moreover, I suspect that few schools that are showing IT do it with any sober critique. How many schools do you really think are assigning Skeptical Environmentalist in conjunction with IT or EITB. I know our local schools are steering clear of Loftburg even though is talk this weekend on CSPAN (US’s public affairs network) was sober rational and nothing what you’d expect of what we are told are Climate Change “Deniers.” I didn’t agree with everything he said, but his many of his comments were valid points and should be a part of the discussion, but aren’t in many districts because IT is being treated as gospel that can’t be argued.
I am not dropping this entirely on Al Gore since school learnin’ has long been focusing more and more on awareness over rigor in some disciplines and it troubles me that science may be the next target for the killer care bears.
As for Mesquito’s comment. PULEEEZE. I had to watch the horrible boy and his lost dog movie Balducci’s “Clown” almost every year in elementary school. Remember that one which along with “Red Balloon” was one of the top selling “educational” films on the planet? They should show it at Gitmo just to see what the I-care-more-about-human-rights-than-you community would do. Every year, there was a kid or two who lost a pet and screamed uncontrollably for the rest of the day, or at least until recess. The rest of us had to calm them down before they hyperventilated, passed out from emotional trauma or threw up in an hysterical fit, while the teacher just sat there numb having been totally broken from having to watch it far more times than we ever had to.
The little fartling who had to watch IT four times got off lucky as far as I’m concerned. At least IT has a point.
Saturday 13 October 2007 at 4:10
Also, what Nobel laureate hasn’t overdone things a bit in light of a “personal political agenda”?
Er … how about Albert Fert and Peter Grünberg? I’m sure they play politics too, but this is confined to the Physics Department tea room. And the results of their work can be found in the computer sitting in front of you right now.
In my opinion it’s not only Albert Gore’s win that’s bollocks. I have a problem with the Nobel Peace Prize in general, and the way its recipients are nominated and chosen.
The cynic in me agrees with your conclusion, but still I don’t think that Gore’s latest win should go without critical comment. There are plenty of unsung heroes in the world deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. I just wish the Norwegian Nobel Committee would get off their lardy arses and find them.
Sunday 14 October 2007 at 12:22
[loony rightwing crank comments — deleted for purposes of cleanliness]
Monday 15 October 2007 at 22:45
“There are plenty of unsung heroes in the world deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Unfortunately those unsung heros are too busy stirring the pudding (which is never a peaceful affair).
If things continue the way they are going with the Nobel, the keepers of the world’s gulags and diggers of mass graves will be getting the prize for making sure that tranquility is presevered in the various dictatorships of the world.