- Léo’s Insights 2021-2022
- Léo’s Insights 2019-2020
- Léo’s Insights 2022-2023
- Léo’s Insights 2020-2021
- Léo’s Insights 2018-2019 Academic Year
Categories: Léo’s Insights 2018-2019 Academic Year, Misleadership Series
Applying what we have learned about not accepting the information we are given at face value and knowing that we are often being manipulated to support causes we know very little, if anything, about, all towards a predetermined goal, I thought it might be time to consider what might have happened within the realm of education in the Province of Alberta since 2015.
Please understand that this particular issue cannot be entirely blamed on or attributed to the existing NDP Government as it begins with Bill 10, created and passed by the previous Progressive Conservative Government before the 2015 election. Still, the majority of what may be considered to be the most egregious actions have indeed been initiated and implemented by the existing Minister of Education.
Remembering that an agency often gets what it wants by employing issues that are not really related to the ultimate goal, Alberta’s Minister of Education wants to put an end to bullying. This noble cause, that everyone can and should support, is presented as the objective behind his desire for “safe and caring” schools.
However, when all that has been happening in education in this province in the last four years is unpacked, there is reason to suspect that ending bullying may not actually be the ultimate purpose behind the Minister’s initiatives. This is made obvious by the Minister’s insistence on using “bully tactics” to get his way!
Let’s have a look at all the pieces and see if we arrive at a different picture from the one being presented to us by our government.
While ending bullying is presented as the impetus behind what is happening, bullying only seems to be a problem when it applies to LGBTQ students or those holding the more “progressive” non-binary gender views. This is not to disparage concerns related to these students, but why the favouring of one group needing protection when there are others that are also subject to being bullied? Is that not also a form of selective bullying?
There are all kinds of children being bullied in schools. Other than Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs), why are we not hearing of other “Alliances” such as Overweight-Skinny Alliances, Clumsy-Athletic Alliances, Special-Not So Special Needs Alliances? How about Black, Brown, Red-White Alliances, Moslem-Jew, Christian-Secular or Protestant-Catholic Alliances?
When considering this simple observation, one can be forgiven for questioning whether or not the ending of bullying is really the ultimate objective.
Now, if the goal is indeed to end bullying, why does Bill 24 address a need to keep parents from knowing which group their children are participating in? Could this also be bullying? Why the need to pass a law preventing parents from knowing what their children are doing at school? Considering some of the other possible “Alliances,” it makes no sense to have such a dictate or to restrict its application to only one group.
Therefore, one can question whether this is about bullying, protecting LGBTQ students, disenfranchising parents or some greater objective. When further considering how the same government passed another Bill (22) that diminishes parental roles and responsibilities, it is easier to see that what is being presented may not be what is actually being done.
Let’s look at a few more “things” that may shed additional light on what is occurring with education in Alberta.
Since the inception of the NDP Government, there has been a real push by a cohort of self-serving agencies to eliminate alternatives to public education, including Catholic and especially private schools.
Now, I am not convinced the general public would see a singular education system in the same light as would these agencies or the government, since choice in education has long been one of the pillars of our provincial education system. Some “issue or crisis” would likely have to be created to persuade the masses that a single educational system is required.
Having said that, can you think of something that seems to connect a lot of these issues together? Have you noticed that LGBTQ issues somehow seem to be involved in every grievance being advanced against parents, groups that are not conforming to the narrative, Catholic schools, private schools and others? However, is protecting LGBTQ students really the end objective? Let’s continue.
What could disenfranchising parents, disparaging Catholic schools, threatening the suspension of accreditation or the defunding of faith-based schools as well as scolding, debasing or accusing any and all opposition to “protecting” the LGBTQ community have in common?
It should come as no surprise that all of these perceived grievances could be addressed if all students were forced to attend a monopoly government education system.
However, why is such a system desired in the first place? A clue is given when observing that pretty well all those proposing a singular public education system are coming from a socialist perspective. Once that is understood, there remains one more related development to consider.
Almost immediately after the NDP majority win in 2015, the Minister of Education called for the complete overhaul of Alberta’s K-12 curriculum. Advancing the “modernizing” of the entire provincial Programs of Study as necessary to create “agents of change” (their words), the government provides real clues as to what the end objective to all these recent developments in education could be.
Please understand that the LGBTQ community, or any other group, has every right to expect to be treated with respect and putting an end to bullying of any type is a noble cause.
However, is it possible that bullying in general and defending the LGBTQ in particular are not really the causes being advanced, but rather that which is being used to create an environment where the masses will demand or accept a singular monopoly public education system where a new “progressive” curriculum can be universally applied to create agents that will change our existing world into something else?
The Minister may not be ultimately interested in protecting students. He may be more intent on separating them from their parents and their faith so he can impose his own worldview perspective upon them within a system fully under his control.
If you give some real serious thought to this from the Christian worldview, it appears as though our present Minister of Education is intent on recreating students in his image and in his likeness.
Once again, it is imperative that we remember that not all things are as they seem.
Previous Post: Being Misinformed: Misleadership (Part 1)
Next Post: Being Misled: Misleadership (Part 3)