There are already groups of protesters gathering in Melbourne for the schoolkids strike as I write this on our morning deadline. On the steps of Parliament House, at Fed Square, outside the State Library, all the places of stone, glass and concrete, they’re flocking, in bright colours, with rainbow signs. They’re striking at unis, in secondary schools, in primary schools, in kindergartens.
According to a tweet by Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old young woman who sparked the movement, there will be close to 1800 separate strikes in 112 countries today — with, one would imagine, tens of thousands of strike sites. What started as separate acts of absolute refusal — Thunberg’s 2018 one-person protest outside the Swedish parliament the most prominent — has become a global movement.
The right, of course, are losing their tiny minds over this spectacle — though the right are so broken these days that even gloating is of little amusement. But it’s worth examining the manner of their outraged objection to see what’s really going on. Most telling is their strangled cry that these kids are being manipulated by leftie teachers, filling their heads with trendy radical nonsense, that language being only a mild exaggeration of the endless screeds of the Donnellys, d’Abreras, Lathams, etc.
Teachers manipulating students? Across the country, millions of teachers are sighing and thinking, if only. The idea that high school students are perfect little neocon subjects — future work and consumption units — being corrupted by longhairs is necessary to their fantasy of the conservative silent majority out there, waiting to be awoken.
It’s a bizarre example of the stuckness of generational thinking — boomers who were 20 at Woodstock are 70 now. But, more importantly, it’s an example of how clueless the right are about social and cultural change. For them, teenagers are still the mid-20th-century artefact of industrialism and mass culture, dutifully or otherwise absorbing their school lessons, hanging out at the malt shop, taking in a talkie, and waiting for the exciting opportunity to finally become actual people when they turn 18.
In this scenario, teenagers are wholly separated from the dull world of adulthood and public affairs — the boring newspaper, the stuffy TV news — by their youth, and the classroom is the sole conduit of information, hijacked by beatnik teachers intent on driving the kids wiiiiiild! This isn’t reality. This is a 1950s juvenile delinquent movie playing on Nine Gem, called something like Hey Daddio! What could be more indicative than the fact that they keep talking about kids “wagging” school — as if this were an Enid Blyton adventure, not a mass political action.
For all their focus on the wonders of progress and the importance of individual liberty, the small-town right haven’t noticed that every one of these kids over eight has a smartphone in their hand. The short explanation of what’s happening this morning is that kids ain’t kids anymore. The whole category of childhood has been upended, and political and social institutions have to adapt.
The simple way of saying this is that the category of childhood — after about the age of seven — developed with the rise of print, and the rise of the school in its modern form. Starting with the aristocracy, and spreading to all classes over subsequent centuries, the “child”, the “teenager”, the “adolescent” — from about 10 to about 17 — was one who lived in an intermediate world. They were expected to turn their attention to the wider world in a guided fashion, but to be bounded by intimate authority, of the family, the classroom, the church.
The rise of broadcast mass culture heightened the contradiction in the 20th century. Public life became the boring, dutiful thing, fantasy and release — music, films, drugs, sex — an assertion against such, a childish way of being adult.
With the internet, social media and the smartphone those divisions have broken down rapidly. Kids live in multiple worlds, plugged directly in to the global flow. Their exhausted, shambling teachers trying to spruik Emily Dickinson and the Treaty of Utrecht haven’t done it to ’em, you clowns — the truth has. Despite the right’s mutterings about declining standards, subjects like high school science and maths are as demanding as undergrad courses once were. So the attentive ones have the tools to understand what they’re seeing on the websites. This process is faster and more fluid than any of us over a certain age can really understand or imagine now. The kid/adult relationship to the world is being reversed by technology.
That’s what the right don’t get. Taking control of your life and destiny is the new punk rock. It is not an escape from reality, but its opposite, that attaches adolescent energy to it. In periods of crisis, adolescents have always emerged as leaders: numerous WWII resistance leaders, ANC commanders were 16 years old.
In our general crisis, that particular process has become general. They’ve all become leaders. Whether the schoolkids’ movement rises and falls, or rises and rises, over the next few years, as these things do, is unknowable — and also less important.
What matters now is that we don’t hide behind a fake generationalism — “argh, we selfish boomers killed the world; OK, kids, over to you. We’ll be watching Netflix.” — and leave them to it. Next year, the school students’ strike needs to be turned into workplace and other strikes, something even bigger: the general social strike against a system trying to kill life on Earth.
Great piece, Guy. Very well expressed. 100% in agreement.
Yes to that.
Same here. Love your last paragraph.
Couldn’t agree with you more Guy.. The Government is struggling to deal with this as it means that these young people have a better understanding of what’s going on…
This leaves them with even less control than they already don’t have..
I say go the young ones & yes a general strike throughout Australia & the world around this will highlight how important an issue it currently is, the fact that only superficial efforts are being done to tackle climate change, is truly worrying
Please don’t associate being right wing with being a ‘ boomer’ . We marched in the moratoriums against the Vietnam war. We marched against Apartheid. We marched and protested against many things.
I was a lefty environmentalist before there were such things. Climate change became apparent as early as 1985 and I have been in despair since as consecutive right wing governments have ignored the science, a world wide phenomena.
I think it is wonderful that kids are finally marching again, as we did. For a great cause.
Yes Gwen same here. It’s been pretty plain for thirty years that climate change was going to bite hard. I’m a boomer and railed against this denialist tripe all this time.
However Guy, another quality piece reminding me why I still pay for Crikey.
The students are revolting – again and it’s about time.
G and M
I didn’t associate being a boomer with being right wing. I was pointing out that the right caricatured boomer/Heh x teachers with being left wing.
I also argued against the ‘we killed the planet’ boomer selfhate as an excuse for inaction
Can’t help but wonder where boomer teachers sit lol…..
Don’t knock “self hate” – it’s highly applicable to Boomers with a shred of awareness – or wokediness as the kiddies might say.
If they understood grammar. Which they don’t, rools being just dead ole stuff.
Boomer is a mindset, don’t take it personally.
Unfortunately the use of boomer as a collective description does exactly what every other stereotype used as a dog whistle does, the does get up on their hind legs and bark in tune.
Either use boomers only in the context of describing the years that a certain group was born or don’t use it at all.
I was born in that set of years and have to put up with being a member of a group that has been collectively blamed for everything that’s going wrong. And yet some of that group started worrying about the environment long before it became fashionable, marched against the Vietnam war etc etc and some of them got their heads kicked in for it. So let’s stop the collective name calling and do something real, get out and march, vote, support objections to corporate capitalism but stop name calling or looking for a collective to blame when it’s clear that using collective is a distraction and possibly just a form of ageism.
Thanks Gwen, you said it for me!
And we marched against Bjelke Petersen and got arrested for protesting against all things nuclear.
And had the shit kicked out of us for long hair. Good training though.
I was there with you!! still there!with you.!
I’d suggest earlier than 1985 but by the time it hit me (late 60/earl70s) we thought only in terms of pollution of air, water & soil by novel chemicals and resource depletion.
Halcyon daze before the neolib nutbaggery took hold – Laffer was still in grad school but Raygun was already governor of California (twice!) and being groomed as Prez – how we larfed, not even amerikans could be that stoopid!
Alas, so many who went back to the land & simpler ways found out that simple is not necessarily easy.
Esp when the M/F dichotomy was unchanged – the blokes too over entitlted/bone idle/stoned/drunk to get off their increasingly fat arses and women, as always, concerned primarily about their children and realising the men were a waste of space.
Climate change or similar manifestations were apparent way before 1985. I read popular science books from pre WW1 which worried about over population,pollution and human beings effect on the natural world. As a young boomer in the late 60’s,in England, I remember thinking if everybody else gets what we have here we’re fucked.
Spot on, Gwen. My first environmental activism was in the ACT in 1971 when we encouraged a school program to stop non- biodegradable detergents from polluting the Canberra waterways. My five year old grandson sat me down last year to make sure that I understood the dangers of plastic to marine life. I may be a boomer but our current government has succeeded in turning me into a rabid leftie.
The number of hysterical right wing responses to today’s strike on sites such as The Conversation has surprised me, as has the wording of these responses, which is almost identical to the kind of comments students received fifty years ago when they marched against the Vietnam War. But behind this hysteria you can clearly hear … fear. They are terrified by what is happening.
Wasn’t it Buffalo Springfield’s “For What It’s worth” (aka “Something’s Happening Here”) that provided the scary premonition?
Beautifully put – thanks to technology 21st century kids are exposed to complex concepts and many are more than equipped to understand and form an opinion on them. The right still believe in magic bullets but kids like the ones who participated in the climate strike are media savvy and consume information from a range of sources; science class to news media to memes. Mine ask me almost daily about what will happen because of climate change. Why should we tell them that change is out of their control? That they will have to wait until they’re 18 to vote for someone who will toss up the cost to profit against the cost to life on earth? It’s hard to rationalise our current system of planetary destruction with the simple truth that such a system isn’t inevitable and could be changed in the blink of better policy. The other issue is that schools wouldn’t support striking students or even participate because of the political conflict. They should be able to act on conscience and get involved despite the threat of penalty. As you say Guy, we need a full blown social strike. The gvt is trying to intimidate and undermine striking students but despite their best efforts to bully them into submission on national anti bullying day, the students are not a fringe, radical group. They are completely informed but terrified kids who are appalled at the adults’ lack of action.
Strikes were made so near illegal (by Labor!) as to be a non starter.
‘Look out kid they keep it all all hid. 20 years of schooling and they put you on the day shift’……. Except, as Guy Rundle said, it ain’t hid anymore,
Just a thought about our young people.
Back in the day a young man came out to Sydney from England and made rather a good name for himself. Edward John Eyre by name. Young Ted was 17 years when he left home, and arrived with a bit of cash and some letters of introduction. So what;’s all this right-wing twaddle about 16 year olds?