Labour's Decolonised School Curriculum Plans To Reject Western Science

This is how much they despise white ethno-Europeans, Britons, Americans, Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders. Not content to displace us via wave after wave after wave of legal and illegal Third World immigration, they seek to erase our history, our culture and now our awesome and undeniable scientific and technological achievements. First they came for the Industrial Revolution with their ‘Clean Energy transition’ from coal, oil, gas and nuclear to Medieval wind technology and solar power. Now they’re coming for the Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, the birth of science in the cradle of western civilisation. More than 2000 years of scientific thought and development spanning Greek, Roman and modern Anglosphere and European nations - with a few notable contributions from Indian, Chinese and Arabic pioneers. Barring the not insignificant, but hardly overwhelming contributions from our ethnically diverse cousins, it’s all white, white, white and . . . . . OMG! . . . . . Jewish! You can see why they wish to totally erase it in the minds of our younger generations. Then they can just rewrite the History of Science using a more acceptable list of diversified, decolonised characters - kind of like the BBC has decolonised British history by making our Kings and Queens African. I mean, why not?

Kids in school can be taught that a German Jew took all the credit for General and Special Relativity, whereas it was actually the brainchild of a Saudi Arabian Muslim who studied the constellations and named many of the stars. Plus Einstein would never have been able to formulate Relativistic mechanics if that nice Indian man hadn’t invented the concept of zero (and how would we have had Net Zero if not for that nice Indian!?). Nor would that British upstart Newton have been able to formulate differential calculus for that matter, if it were not for the Chinese, the Arabs and the Indians. You think I’m joking. I’m not joking:

The Institute of Physics said that children should be taught that the development of physics “relied on ideas and thinking from many people and varied groups globally”.

As well as attempting to teach non-Western science, and explaining the prevalence of Western ideas, societies have recommended downplaying famed scientists in favour of contemporary role models.

They have also argued that pupils should be taught about the reasons non-Western regions made fewer scientific breakthroughs.

The Institute of Physics advised that scientific ideas should be “framed in the context of the times in which discoveries were made and accredited within Western science”.

The society suggested that teachers can tell pupils that “many of those discoveries drew on earlier work in other parts of the world”.

This approach has been echoed by the Association for Science Education, and by the Royal Society of Biology.

They advise that pupils should be informed that “during the period of growth of Western science” some “groups, cultures and nations” were “less able to participate in research, resource scientific activity, or claim credit and ownership for ideas”.

The Royal Statistical Society has suggested novel ways of improving diversity in the discipline, telling the curriculum review that lessons could include statistics on “gender inequalities” and migration.

The Royal Society has recommended a “more diverse and equitable model for mathematics education”.

The recommendations will be considered by the review committee appointed by the Department for Education, which will inform its own recommendations for a transformation of the curriculum.

The term of reference for the review explicitly states that any future curriculum must reflect “issues and diversities of our society, ensuring all children and young people are represented”.

The committee’s call for evidence stated that any future curriculum must produce “well-rounded citizens, who appreciate the diversity and pluralism of our society”.

I’ll tell you about the “reasons non-Western regions made fewer scientific breakthroughs” - it’s because they made fewer scientific breakthroughs, i.e. in most cases, none! It’s because ‘Western science’ is just that - almost exclusively Western science and Jewish science! The rabid Left hate that, they really do. It has eaten away at them for years and years and now finally, they have hatched their dastardly plan to erase Western science and replace it with an appealingly diverse black and brown-shaded pluralistic, gender-diverse, global scientific revolution - which never bloody happened! But so what. When you’re doing a history rewrite akin to Pol Pot’s Year Zero it doesn’t matter.

But here’s the thing: Lefties are nothing if not bloody stupid. Because, in their haste to diversify the teaching of science in schools, they are also eager to make ‘climate change’ compulsory in schools - so they can brainwash the younger generation about the fictional ‘climate crisis’ and the supposed urgent need for a Green energy transition. The problem is, ‘climate science’ - and man-made climate change in particular - is almost exclusively the preserve of an annoyingly non-diverse clique of mainly white, male, Western scientists. Just look at the early history of the so called Greenhouse Effect:

The existence of the greenhouse effect, while not named as such, was proposed as early as 1824 by Joseph Fourier. The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838. In 1856 Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that the warming effect of the sun is greater for air with water vapour than for dry air, and the effect is even greater with carbon dioxide.

John Tyndall was the first to measure the infrared absorption and emission of various gases and vapors. From 1859 onwards, he showed that the effect was due to a very small proportion of the atmosphere, with the main gases having no effect, and was largely due to water vapor, though small percentages of hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide had a significant effect. The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896, who made the first quantitative prediction of global warming due to a hypothetical doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

I’m going to launch into a Humza Yousaf type rant here:

Fourier - white (French); Pouillet - white (French); Foote - white (American); Tyndall - white (Irish); Arrhenius - white (Swedish).

This is the early development of ‘climate science’. It didn’t get much more diverse later on:

Keeling - white (American); Callendar - white (English); Broecker - white (American); Manabe - not white! (Japanese-American); James Hansen - white (American).

There are others I’ve not given credit to, but these were the main players: almost all white and either European, British or American. Where’s the diversity? Even now, the majority of ‘scientists’ plugging the man-made climate change narrative on social media and in the press are white Westerners - though they’ve become a bit more gender diverse (well, quite a few white women have hopped aboard actually, no trannies AFAIK). If they’re going to make climate change ‘science’ compulsory but also going to decolonise climate science, then they’re going to have to erase ‘climate science’ altogether! It’s as simple as that. They are utter morons. It’s as simple as that.