Will teen suffrage give left-wing educators proxy ballots?
During my time as a schoolteacher in England, we were advised in training to join a teachers’ union to protect ourselves from false accusations by disgruntled students, such as claims of inappropriate conduct behind the bike sheds. But which union to affiliate with? The National Union of Teachers (NUT), known for being the country’s largest and most radical union, was certainly not recommended—the name was fitting as the organization harbored more “nuts” than a squirrel with a blockage.
Although the NUT no longer exists under that name—having rebranded as the National Education Union (NEU) in 2017 following a merger—its membership seems even more extreme than before.
Class Clowns
The conference did address some valid workplace concerns. Delegate Charlotte Lawrence advocated for greater safeguards against assaults on teachers, citing rising incidents where educators were physically attacked—grabbed, kicked, punched, spat upon, or cornered in classrooms. However, she attributed this violence not to the aggressors themselves, who were viewed as expressing “unrecognized trauma,” but to a government that was insufficiently left-wing and failed to allocate enough funds to schools. The implication being: throwing money at the problem will somehow pacify violent pupils.
Lawrence’s remarks reflect the typical NEU mindset: whatever issues arise, the blame falls on a “too right-wing” ruling party. This narrative held easier sway when the Conservative Party was in charge. Yet even after Labour, a more openly leftist party, took power in 2024, violent incidents persisted. The explanation? Labour wasn’t left-wing enough in the NEU’s view.
Kebede frames this as “a vision of education built on possibility rather than scarcity,” essentially promising continuous financial investment to teachers, supposedly ending violent incidents in classrooms by endless funding. Kebede himself is a self-declared Marxist of Ethiopian descent, whose father escaped Marxism in Ethiopia only for his son to become a prominent advocate of it in Britain.
Teaching Or Preaching?
But Polanski’s support came with strings attached: he pressed teachers to politically indoctrinate students. “Education is at the heart of how we defeat the far right,” he declared, asserting that lessons should prepare all children to fight this threat. According to him, teachers must offer an education that genuinely readies young people for their complex world by imparting media literacy necessary in an era overwhelmed by social media and “fake news.”
What “fake news” did Polanski aim to eliminate? Certainly not claims warning of imminent climate catastrophe from ongoing fossil fuel use. Instead, NEU President Ed Harlow clarified the falsehoods they aimed to combat involved far-right narratives blaming migrants, Muslims, or trans people for societal issues, as outlined here.
The NEU plans to deploy political funds to fight Reform UK, encouraging local branches to affiliate with Stand Up To Racism. This group, resembling UK Antifa, mobilizes left-wing activists to counter anti-immigration demonstrations by concerned parents opposing the sexual exploitation of underage girls by vulnerable adult asylum seekers near schools. One speaker declared this stance a “resistance,” though critics argue it sides with the imported schoolgirl rapists. Are teachers meant to safeguard their pupils or expose them to danger?
Schools of Thought
Another NEU strategy involves creating and circulating “anti-racist teaching materials” aimed at undermining Reform UK’s appeal. Meanwhile, the Labour Party, believing younger voters will favor leftist policies, has lowered the voting age to 16. This extension enfranchises 1.7 million teenagers in the upcoming 2029 election—a move the NEU intends to exploit to indoctrinate youth against “Fascist Farage.”
These NEU tactics clearly violate Sections 406 and 407 of the Education Act 1996, which forbid UK schools from endorsing “partisan political views” and require “balanced presentation of opposing views” on political subjects when discussed with pupils.
How can the NEU expect to avoid repercussions? Because enforcement of these rules is lax. British schools routinely operate under the assumption that Nigel Farage and Reform UK are Nazis. Last year, an investigation revealed that schools within the private Orion Education chain were employing PowerPoint presentations depicting Reform UK as bordering on fascism, positioning them alongside a swastika on a chart of major UK parties.
The slide titled “How can political views lead to extremism?” explained that while Reform UK isn’t outright Nazi, its anti-immigration stance is a gateway to fascism—initially wanting fewer crimes by Muslims, before escalating into calls for atrocities against Jews. This framing presents Reform as a stepping stone to extremism, encouraging rejection of “British values like mutual respect” and resistance to the “existing social order.” Yet given the shortcomings of Britain’s post-Blair “social order,” why should opposing it be labeled fascist?
Polanski’s push for “media literacy” classes to block “fake news” were already implemented in Orion schools. These lessons promote consumption of “trusted sites” like the left-leaning Guardian and BBC while discouraging reading right-wing outlets such as The Sun or Daily Mail, which are accused of sensationalizing immigration coverage—truthful reporting, in their view.
In one shocking case, a school displayed a photo of Farage alongside Hitler and Mussolini on an “educational” wall. Teachers defended this by claiming it addressed “public safety concerns” and asserted it was not political bias but factual reporting on the dangers of far-right extremism, as reported here.
Within this heavily politicized atmosphere, students declaring support for Reform are treated as “safeguarding issues,” with parents receiving warnings that their children are part of a “Farageist Hitlerjugend,” as detailed in phone calls home. With the 2029 election three years away, efforts are underway to prevent 13-year-olds from voting for “Nazis.” Yet, will these youths even bother voting?
Interestingly, a January survey of the first group eligible to vote at 16 found that none were aware of the lowered voting age. Upon learning of it, the majority opposed the change, citing lack of political awareness and immaturity—traits shared, regrettably, by many of their teachers.
Original article: theamericanconservative.com
About the Author
