So another press release has arrived from THE AGENCY FOR EARLY MEAT WEANING.
They have measured again, and the numbers are good.
67 percent of Danes wish to some degree to eat less meat, cold cuts, poultry and fish, and the agency emphasises that "to some degree" is of course a recognised category at RUC, encompassing everything from having considered it in the queue at Netto to having said yes just to make the questionnaire stop.
That the same 67 percent in the same survey expect to eat EXACTLY as much meat in a year as they do today is, according to the agency, not a contradiction, but an expression that the Danes are on a journey - just that the journey perhaps hasn't really begun yet.
Meanwhile, the University of Copenhagen, with funding from the Plant Foundation, as reported last week, has asked how Danes would react if the canteen at work made the wish a reality.
One in five would become angry. Four out of ten irritated. Half would feel their freedom restricted. The agency therefore concludes that there is nothing wrong with the Danes' wish to eat less meat, for it has been measured at 67 percent, but that there is something wrong with the same Danes if they are confronted with the result of it in the canteen. The wish is documented. It is reality that has not yet adjusted to it.
And then comes what stands in the press release as a subordinate clause, but which is actually the entire point for those who can read.
The agency quotes its chairman - "I believe that getting in early with children is what can have a huge significance (for reducing Danes' meat consumption)."
He says that because the adults have proven extremely difficult to get voluntarily into withdrawal. They answer the right thing when you ask them - and then do the wrong thing when they shop in the supermarket. And on top of that, they even become angry when you decide and regulate over their heads.
They have tried education, campaigns, taxes, pamphlets, shame, and it has yielded 67 percent "to some degree" and meatballs, rissoles and roast pork in the oven in the real world.
So now they want to "get in early".
Because children have the advantage that they don't yet know what they think. They have no freedom to feel restricted in. They can't put the beef back in the refrigerated counter, because they have no money, and they don't get angry about the canteen, because they have never known another. You don't even need to convince them. You just need to get between their ears before anyone else does.
Super smart.
And here the agency discovers that it is not alone in the building.
Because two floors up sits THE OFFICE FOR CLIMATE ANXIETY IN PRIMARY SCHOOL.
They work with the climate and discovered the same thing fifteen years ago. The adults read the reports, took note of them and just carried on living without worry, anxiety or transformation.
So they went to the children.
And today we have a generation that has cried over polar bears before it could read, and which goes to a psychologist with an anxiety it was handed through assignments where it had to draw burning planets and feel ashamed of being alive - and through teaching materials about climate activism, handed out in primary school, as if it were a pencil case.
They call it awareness. The child doesn't call it anything. It doesn't know it was possible to feel differently.
And in the basement sits THE UNIT FOR PREMATURE IDENTITY CLARIFICATION.
They work with gender and were most consistent of all. They found that the country's adults had lived an entire life in two genders and didn't find it difficult at all - and that won't do.
So they also went where life had not yet been lived, to the nursery, to the kindergarten, to the years when a child doesn't yet know what a question is, and then they asked the question anyway.
Whether it was sure about it. The gender. Whether it had thought about it. An idea that has held up every single civilisation for thousands of years became something a five-year-old had to take a position on before fruit break and the distribution of fig bars.
Three offices. Three causes. One method.
You ask the adults a question.
They say no.
So you find those who cannot answer yet, and make sure that when they eventually can, the answer is already installed and given for them.
This is not how humans have always passed something on to their children. The old world gave children what the parents themselves believed in and lived by themselves - and gave it at the dinner table, in church, in daily life.
In The New World™ it is given to the children - The New People™ - bypassing the parents, and it is given precisely because the parents have said no. That is the entire difference.
The old was inheritance.
This is circumvention.
Programming.
So Man chooses "the right thing".
So when TV2 finally asks in the post whether you could imagine halving your meat consumption - it's not really you they are asking.
You have answered. All the adults have answered. That is why the question is heading somewhere else.
They don't only go to the children because they are the future.
They go to them because they are the only ones who cannot say no.
Did you get it?
😏
