On the 23rd of September 2019 in New York was opened The UN Climate Summit. A Swedish 15-year-old girl Greta Turnberg, who is known for making radical speeches in defence of the planet's ecology, was invited to give the opening speech.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg
The girl sailed across the Atlantic Ocean to the UN statement by a sailing yacht, as she basically does not fly on aeroplanes: they burn jet fuel, polluting the atmosphere. But the young eco-activist’s speech was not as motivating as expected. She "blew up" the organization's climate summit, saying that world politicians are only concerned about money, not the actual salvation of the planet
Let’s watch Greta’s Thunberg speech on The UN Climate Summit 2019:
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg
The girl sailed across the Atlantic Ocean to the UN statement by a sailing yacht, as she basically does not fly on aeroplanes: they burn jet fuel, polluting the atmosphere. But the young eco-activist’s speech was not as motivating as expected. She "blew up" the organization's climate summit, saying that world politicians are only concerned about money, not the actual salvation of the planet
Let’s watch Greta’s Thunberg speech on The UN Climate Summit 2019:
You may think that Greta Thunberg is just a young girl who worries a lot about our planet and tries to save it, but there is something else. She has Asperger Syndrome, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, and Selective Mutism. People with Asperger Syndrome are often above average or very smart. Children with Asperger Syndrome often have special interests that go beyond the usual measures. They are almost exclusively concerned about their topic and do not understand that others are less interested in it. Greta Tunberg’s doctors diagnosed her with Asperger syndrome when she was twelve years old.
Thunberg was dealing with climate change for eight or nine years. Since then, she refused to eat meat and milk and bought new things only when it was extremely necessary. As Greta grew worried about the “existential threat” of climate change, Greta had a depression at the age of eleven, stopped eating and stopped attending school. Helios Andries Korebrits, Chief Physician of the Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Psychiatry of the Leipzig Park, notes that these are typical symptoms of people with Asperger Syndrome. “Everything is very black and white, for those who have Asperger’s syndrome, there is no grey shade” - the doctor says: “These people react very violently only to what interests them.”
Unfortunately, there are also people who use this innocent girl for their own profit.
One of the first to "monetize" Greta is a Swedish PR specialist, Ingmar Rentzhog, who spotted her striking near the walls of the Swedish Parliament in August 2018. Shortly before, Rentzhog created his eco-project “We Don’t Have Time” and then, under Greta's banner, raised several million dollars for it. According to the Svenska Dagbladet, he used her name in advertising brochures for potential investors, promising huge benefits from explosive content through green business-sponsored advertising. However, the Swiss Die Weltwoche in the article entitled "We create an icon of ecology" noted that Greta's promotion may not have been as spontaneous as it is represented. So, Rentzhog met her not by accident, but because he had been warned about Greta's strike.
Today, the main beneficiary of its phenomenon in the Green Party. Although Greta herself does not directly support them and does not call for them to vote, her ideas largely overlap with their agenda. In the European Parliament elections this year, the Greens showed the best result in history, gaining about 20 percents of the votes.
Some call Greta Thunberg a new prophet, others hate her, but it is impossible to ignore her phenomenon today. And not even so important are her diagnosis or lack of real professional competence.
Questions:
What do you think about Greta’s phenomenon?
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Sources:
Made by Anastasiia Churyk s19307
Comments
2. I don’t think so, because as I said, she didn’t invent anything which we wouldn’t already know. I assume that eventually she’ll become quiet and everyone will forget about her. She’s just another speaker among many others. Real actions matter, like for example hard work of engineers and scientists who present concrete solutions, but they are not famous and ignorant society don’t care about such people. It is possible though, that such people will get more support because of well known activists like Greta Thunberg. Then it would absolutely make sense.
3. Some children are more intelligent than a grown man. The problem is that children are usually not familiar with certain issues of everyday life, thus their judgement is incomplete. I think that children should be allowed to discuss issues at the national and global level, because sometimes conservatism of adults prevents innovations to be implemented. Denying anyone to share his thoughts is pointless.
I am into such phenomenon, because she is waking people up and kinda showing Feminism. But one thing is not enough, she is simply talking things that everyone knows which is just common sense, I think that is also why this video has "dislike" more than "like", but as a 15 years old child with four-year depression, I appreciate her courage to speak on stages everywhere, In the video, she was angry that adults came to them young people for hope and have stolen her dreams in her childhood, I think she is actually lucky one compare to children in Africa, I think she will have other opinion about what she said that day when she will be a adult look at the world more a bit even in details, she simply just need to attend school in this age and learn more, equip herself with more knowledge and save the planet with more practical actions later.
2.Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I do not think so, as I answer in last question, she need more practical actions when she grow up, most people only care about people who are really hardworking in making effort instead of talking on paper. people might think her sailing is not a paper talk, but this action is more like a topic for chatting, I mean it would be more impressive if she invented something useful for the climate later, like how Easton LaChappelle did when he was 14 years old.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Of course, you can not judge the level of knowledge by age, if this person has knowledge you don't know, then he can become your teacher, even if he is a child. So if the children have enough knowledge for a topic, why not let them discuss? But there might be potential negative pressure on the children which might lead them to depression.
I think this is a very good and positive development. Most adults will agree with her, but not everyone has the courage to talk about such global things at events of this magnitude. Moreover, most likely that she is not so alone. In connection with modern capabilities and expanded information space, we can say that there are a lot of children worrying about the situation on our planet. Therefore, it is worth paying tribute to Greta's parents for giving her the opportunity to speak, and most likely they somehow influenced her point of view, and this point of view is quite correct.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
In general, very true things are discussed at such Summits. I think every presentation and report should be carefully studied and reviewed by the international community, especially organizations that deal with these issues. Well, the most important thing is to take real measures, because the main problem is that such events are held for show, but if it is not, then it is great.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
If children have the opportunity to express an opinion, I think this is great. In my opinion, how happy the society and the world around it is to be judged by children. Therefore, people should give more opportunities for children to express their position, especially on such serious issues. Not every child has a point of view on global topics. But in this case, the world community must listen to the words of Greta.
2. I think it wasn't that important for participants of this summit. These people are highly aware of what they're doing (no matter if it's positive or not) and it would be hard to change their minds. I believe that it was important for an average person, her speech made people talk about it and maybe some of them become more aware of ecological problems.
3. In my opinion it is. Of course kids doesn't have appropriate knowledge about many things. Sometimes discussed topics are not appropriate for them, but in many situations they can share a valuable point of view. What's more, I believe that by letting kids speak, we teach them how to take things in hand and make them understand "adult things" and complexity of this world's issues.
2. I think that her speach was informativ and I appreciate that she pointed to the problem of enviromental pollution that gave adults food for thought. But as I mentioned in my previous answer I think that she was used as a pawn.
3. No, I don't support this idea because children are pliant and adults may use them for their's own ends. Of course it sounds great to give them opportunity to express their opinion but they shouldn't have power to make decisions that affect people all over the world.
Honestly I do not care about her and her "phenomenon". I heard about her before watching her speech but I didn't get interested in the topic.
2.Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I think so, she was all over the media channels and her words were pointing very good situation of our planet.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Of course yes, there is no age limit in taking part in discussion about global world problem and as we can see from small mouth can come big words that can have big impact.
1. I've never heard about her phenomenon and honestly I don't care about her. She talks like she was acting and her speech dosen't get to me.
2. I think yes. She is famous in eco entourage as a young girl who cares about enviroment. It shows that pollution problem is very serious and more people should take it for granted.
3. In my opinion children shouldn't be involved in issues at the national and global level. It's sounds great that the young care about enviroment and so on but they might be easily to manipulated and used for adult's own needs.
I fully agree with the general idea shared by this young teenager. It’s truth that most people and companies care only about the income and their image, not the environment and I do not think it will change in the nearest future. It’s respectable that such a young person have so much brave to come out on a global stage.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I think this might convince some people, but generally speaking, it would be much better to try to find some solutions rather than only judge. Judging itself won’t change anything.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
I don’t see a reason why it could be inappropriate. If somebody has your own opinion and thoughts on some topic, he or she should have a chance to share it with others.
I don't see that as phenomenon, there are lot of children who are doing thousand times more for our planet than this girl, for example there is a boy who invented machine for cleaning out oceans from plastic and dedicated himself to work with it or a boy who planted tens of thousands of trees with his own hands. The phenomenon is the fact that I can't even remember these boys names while I read about them just about last week. That's because our brains respond to emotions and people who "programmed" this girl know about it very well. That's why she is that recognisable and went so viral on the internet. So this "phenomenon" as You called it is just an extremally good marketing.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
No it was not important its main and only purpose was to make money out of her image.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
It's not approperiate and it should not be allowed as as I wrote in the response to the first question, our brains respond to emotions and children are incredibly good in activating emotions in our brains so by using children in "campaigns" marketers are "cheating" the society.
While what she says is true and raises awareness, there is a lot of hypocrisy here. When she sailed across the Atlantic to get to the UN Climate summit, most people who support her and are part of her team got there with the help of planes. She receives the main funding from those who she criticizes. In my opinion, this is a child with a big heart who really cares about the good of our planet exploited by adults.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Her speech may have increased people's awareness of the upcoming global ecological tragedy, but I anticipate that this topic will soon be swept under the carpet and will quiet down, as always.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
I don't think so. Using children for such purposes is a very simple psychological trick. The recipients of such a speech are very emotional about it because the innocent child is the speaker. This is conditioned by psychology, when most people notice a child in distress they automatically react to help. A better move would be to choose an adult representative who could present the children's opinion on the topic.
I think it's good that she somehow raises even more awareness in the subject but in my opinion we need more people with some innovative ideas promoting some actions or behaviors we should take or apply in order to make some difference.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I wouldn't classify her speech as important. The only thing she really did was performing blame and hate speech. If the speech were to be important then we would have heard some action plan regarding this topic.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
I think it would be appropriate only if the child has some extraordinary knowledge in the subject.
2. Yes, it brought mainstream attention and now many people who didn't really care about whole thing are more interested in the topic as well as more aware of the environmental problem. I think there should be more speeches like that.
3. Yes, as long as the person has something worth saying it doesn't matter whether the person is 5 or 50 years old. To me it is ridicoulus that people try to degradate her because of the age. It is our business to take care of earth, as people who "make desicious" will likely die before they can see the effect of their effort.
2)Yep, at least now we have this beautiful post in English class.
3)Of course, because they are future of this planet. But adults, corporations etc. use them for their benefits, and children can't do anything with it. So their performance/speeches/discussions is shot to nowhere.
2. I think that her speech probably was important because it reached a great number of people. After all, who wouldn't hear about Greta and not see even one meme of her. For me personally, this speech didn't matter at all, I didn't take it seriously. As for the people at the Summit, it was probably an uncomfortable situation, everyone had to applaud and nod their heads, after all, you can't laugh at a 15-year-old girl with Asperger, even if you disagree with her strange insinuations.
3. I think that introducing children as defenders of the world isn't a very smart decision, because they don't know much about such serious subjects. In most cases, they build their opinions on the opinions of others. Personally, I would much prefer to hear what a middle-aged man would say who would be very knowledgeable about the subject and if he could really convince me to his views on the current state of the world.
Greta's topic is quite difficult, even though the girl is unable to do anything more than speak to the public, I am glad that she had the courage to do it. On the other hand, the character of Greta who deals only with speeches, overshadows little older geniuses like one young boy who invented the device for cleaning the oceans at an extremely young age, and unfortunately no one talks about it anymore.
2.Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Regardless of whether it is a young girl or anyone else, moving and publicizing these problems is important and certainly has some impact. So I can confidently say that it have matter.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Of course, yes, this young girl showed a higher intelligence than most social poor. Why should we not speak to such people, if they speak well and only allow people with low intelligence to speak because of their age? Allowing this to less intelligent people only creates a million "funny" memes on the internet.
2. No, not at all. It was an unimportant speech on the irrelevant summit. It changed nothing except making the debate about climate change even more controversial and inconclusive.
3. Not in the political space for sure. If we extrapolate this logic, then we might just give them the right to vote on the general elections as well. That is crazy. Voting age set as 18 for a reason and even this is already pushing it as far as it can go.
2.In my opinion it touched important issues and I don't like the way it was presented. Instead of getting message trough I feel like the girl blamed other people and exaggerate too much. It is not the right way to show your view as you can be not understood correctly. Also people who actually care could be hurt to be defined as 'money hungry'.
3. It depends on the maturity of the child. Usually children are not mature enough, they are smart and can have the knowledge, but they lack the experience. Also our decision making is developed later in life. It can put a lot of unwanted stress on the children. I think that children should just live their childhood as they will have time to speak at such topics when they will get older.
I don't quite understand this girl's phenomenon. I think she can only be a tool in the hands of adults. I believe that children should not be involved in politics.
Even if not, she grew up in one of the most developed and ecological countries in the world, so how can she talk about "stolen dreams and childhood", and don't understand this. And besides, I think that people should start with acting and not talking or pointing at the finger of others. The planet belongs to all people, not just Greta.
2. Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I don' think so. I think she divided people more into those who support her and those who don't. The main problem may be how she delivered her speech - full of anger, resentment and most importantly - without proposing any reasonable solutions.
3. Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
As I wrote earlier, I am against something like that. Kids shouldn't be involved in politics.
Honestly, I do not understand it at all. She just repeats the same old same old phrases and slogans used by eco activists for years now. It may be the matter of fact, that most people always love to see this kind of 'sensations', thus her age together with certain disabilities seem to attract many people to the topic of climate change. For me, it seems a little like she is only a tool in some activists hands.
2. Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I would not say that it was important, but rather conspicuous. The speech was definately meant to enhance the number of summit observers and participants. Just a matter of marketing.
3. Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Although I do not support Greta, I have nothing against allowing children to actively take part in politics. But they just might not be treated seriously after all, even if they really have something to say.
2. I think that her speech could be important, because she actually gained some recognition (much of it comes from internet memes, but still). If she decides to pursue this eco path, she won't be just another random activist.
3. In my opinion 99,9% of adults are not suited for politics, let alone children, who can be easily manipulated and deceived. I don't think it is a good idea to put children in politics.
2. I do not believe in the importance of her speech, First of all it didn't say anything of value or real solution. It was based solely on the emotions of a child. Emotions will never solved this kind of problem. We cannot expect a chidl solve a problem someone doesn't want to be solved.
3. I think it is important to raise awareness, but children shouldn't be doing it. we have to let children be children. But we can teach to take more care of the planet withought using them in a vile way
2. Her speech went viral very fast, but does it change anything? There are a lot of people who say that they’re going to change the world, but they aren’t decision makers. This speech would be very important if such words came from people who can make difference.
3. Yes, it’s appropriate to allow children discuss but not appropriate is to use young girl for their own benefits. Despite from the purpose of her speech, the result might be good because now people are going to discuss this topic more seriously.
2. I like to think that every speech given at an event as big as Climate Summit is important and impactful. As controversial as it was it truly moved many people and caused a reaction everyone was hoping for while also rising the awereness on topics that often get overlooked by the society nowadays.
3. If the kid is well prepered and educated about the topic they plan to speak up about, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't be given that opportunity (as long as they doing it by their own will of course). Having a chance to start speaking up in such young age will build up their confidence and prepare them to future, more important debates that they might be intrested in participaiting in. We nowadays live in the global village and kids are able to reach millions of people all around the world via sicoail media such as Twitter or Facebook, so I don't think they should be limited from doing it in more official environment.
I think it's good someone point out such important topic but on the other hand it won't change anything.
2.Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
As i said before i think it won't change anything just let time go and now one will remamber her.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level.
It's hard to say how people will react but i think it's bad. Just tell me who will take child seriously.
2. As one of the more educated person in this topic than anyone else at her age, i think her speech was important, just because of the fact that she has the knowledge to pass down to people.
3. If those children are aware of the topic and have knowledge about this, Yes, i think that it should be appropriate to allow childern to discuss those issues.
2. Thanks to the media, her speech has been publicized so maybe some people will pay attention to climate changes, maybe it will cause some longer discussion. But I don't know if it was important enough to have any special impact.
3. Sometimes young people have more to say than adults, but when a child appears among politicians, will they take them seriously? Will the young person influence their thoughts with such words? Certainly not as big as it would like.
2. I think her speech was very emotional. For us ordinary audience this speech may be important but I am not convinced that the scientists gathered there had similar feelings.
3. Once again, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, the children have a wonderful quality of honesty and truth, they can say what they really feel straight from their hearts, without any overtones or political arrangements. This view of the world can often help open our eyes to many things. On the other hand, even the outstanding children don't have experience, they don't understand the rules of this world yet, sometimes brutal world focused on money, unfortunately not on people and environment.
2. As I said before it was well prepared but not informative at all. Her speech was full of things that everybody knows. I think because of Greta's parents and their professions (actor and opera singer) it felt so realistic and emotional.
3. Not always. Usually, children and teenagers want to show that they know everything and they are much better than their parents or other older people. But because of a small level of experience and knowledge they act naively. Children can talk a lot but they don't really know what to do. Also, some adults can use them for their own purposes.
I am not sure if such phenomenon exists. She is popular for sure but it results from the combination of many factors that I find difficult to recognize.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Probably yes but, when somebody uses children and teenagers in their own interests, it deserves only to be condemned. Modern world is complicated and complex.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
If young people, teenagers, pay attention to the acute problems of the modern world, including ecology, that is right and very good. We need to support them but think people who sit at the head of countries know well what world they live in. The matter is a bit more complicated than it may seem to these children.
2.I think Greta’s speech as not important as many of people said. Firstly I would challenge if this was work of her hands. In my point of view the author of speech was someone else. Now I want refer to the content. In the speech there were no details and only informations that we already hear everywhere. If Greta statement contained, for example an alternative plan how to saved our planes then it achieve much more recognition.
3. I don't think thats goal. School is the place where young people should be in. Kids that want to do changes in politic need to learn about this in education instituion and work hard.I convince that their efforts will pay off. Young people in politics aren't very good, they aren't experienced and mature enough. They can be vicitim of manipulate from olders. After that kids can lasts their friends and reputation.
Personally, event where teenager speaks up at the UN Climate summit is unprecedented in my opinion. I am under this distinct impression, that her position and popularity is created by an entire outfield of PR people, advertising executives and other units from advertising trades. Nevertheless, I’m intrigued how her social career will develop and if we will hear about her in the future.
2. Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Greta’s speech undoubtedly reassured impressive media hype and attracted masses, which led to a higher awareness of an increasing problem. Thanks to her popularity people started to gossip about her, which resulted in spreading more information about collapsing ecosystems and irreversible climate reactions. Even though she seemed a bit unreal and “staged” in my opinion, she, without doubt, brought up significant to our actual lives problem.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
As long as someone is capable to speak up in a substantive manner, their age, skin color or health condition is irrelevant. Thanks to differentiated speakers the whole panel can be expanded by various points of view.
1. To be honest, I doubt very much what Greta says. He is a child, and the children are naive and do not have a full world view. On the other hand, it's good because the younger generation is interested in the environment and good for our planet.
2. I have no idea. Maybe yes maybe no. However, every speech is important at The UN Climate Summit. Every sentence counts. However, I don't know how the child's words affect it. Time will tell.
3. I believe that children should rather avoid discussing problems at national and global level. Because they are still children! They should experience their youth, play with their peers and explore the world.
2. I don't think that it somehow influenced The UN Climate Summit rather it made that girl popular and that's it. As I heard her parents were passionate to make her popular.
3.I think for children it's hard to analyse such kind of global problems, because there are more complex things that cannot be simply done. I believe young people will be able to solve such kind of problems if they devote their childhood to study, learning new things, discovery and get more skilled.
2. When I began watching her speech my first thought was 'this speech is a joke'. When I finished watching it I wondered, why she even appeared there, because it was clearly a joke for me. Half of it were things which people concerned about topic are aware of and rest was just some meaningless rubbish which brings nothing to discussion. I even began to wonder if she's psychically stable, but after reading post till the end, turns out she's not.
3. Children shouldn't be allowed into politics to such degree. Although, people with similar age to her, sometimes have many meritorical things to say, from what I seen from her so far... she doesn't. Not even a small bit of. But back to topic. It's good for kids to learn in young age, but it's what they should do if they are actually pushed into politics early. Play some minor role and learn. Not make some big scenes, which even can't be taken seriously. People responsible for her presence in for example this UN Summit, harm her.
Also, I really dislike title of this post. She has no influence at all. Mentioned Green Party results have nothing to do with her. She'd do more good for the world, if she went to some public event of collecting garbage, as it would actually matter. When it comes to influencing others, I bet that even some dumb Instagram celebrities at younger age than hers, are more influential.
2. In my opinion, this speech was superfluous. She just made a mess.
3. No, it isn't. Children have too little knowledge about the world around us. Only adults should deal with such important things.
I think she is just a child, who is used in adult play. I have a strong feeling, that this is the best example of child maximalism, where every problem is escalated to the enormous size. I support fight with global warming but without using children and dirty play.
2. Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I am not sure. Of course, it created a lot of talking about it and for some time it was a top 1 news but all in all, does it changed anything? I think no, now some part of the world simply laugh from her while another hate her.
3. Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
I think no. I think the global level is more for adults, who knows what they are doing an why and not for children, who are too emotional and have too little knowledge.
2. In my opinion, yes, thanks to this speech climate strikes were organized around the world
3. In my opinion, our task and duty is to include and teach children to discuss problems on a global and national level, because the decisions that are made today relate to the future in which they will live. I think Greta is a good example of how much influence young people can have on global politics.
1. I think that in current world everything is planned. People in high places creates "heros" and "icons" to zero in on them. Moreover ecology is hot topic for days, so it was predictable that young girl with her emotional speech turn to political leaders will touch our society. I think that there is a lot of remarkable people who deserve to be glorified more than swedish teenage environmental activist. In my opinion she didn't do anything special. She seems to be a mascot in ecology mafia.
2.Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
2. I think that her speech didn't contribute something special. We heard about people's negative environmental impact. In some case it is important to remind socity about environmental danger but I think that none be serious about shouting young girl who didn't confront the reality of modern world. It is easy for her talking about crysis and order people to stop damaging the environment, but she doesn't know the cost.
3.Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
3. I think that it is sick that people using children for thier own goals. Children should learn, play and discover the world, not repeating someone's words.
1. I think first look of her performance is impressive but if we look much closer and google her "background" we can tell she is just a "PR" product of one of the best persons of this industry, I mean Ingmar Rentzhog. We can say he creates Greta's phenomenon. You can ask, who is Ingmar Renztzhog? He is businessman and one of the best Public relations experts.
2. Climate change is one of the most challenging issues of mankind. Unfortunately nowadays this subject is politicized and a lot of people treat this as one of sides. I think her speech confirm these people that climate change is just political subject (
which is not true).
3. Children should not be used to discuss global issues and problems. Young people can be easily manipulated to manipulate public opinion. Children were used in many political systems and for me it should be regulated by law. It's immoral and cruel.
I dont understand it. I have watched some of her speeches before and she hardly ever uses arguments. She only is making claims to the politics that they don't do well or as good as they could which might be true but unargumented words of a teenager in my eyes is only a marketing move for the greens.
Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
I don't think so. I don't know if this was from that conference but i saw a photo of her speeking to an almost empty room.
Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
Of course it is, but emotions shouldn't be the only thing children will refer to.
For me, the next reason , she read from a paper, how can I be sure that it is not
is the manifesto and this is a substituted girl?
I wonder why she was nominated for an Oscar, for what? Millions of people are struggling with humanity's problems, but they don't fool it so much, they just act.
I think that for The UN Climate Summit it was quite important because they are struggling with the problems Greta was talking about.
But it seems to me that they invited her to a publicity conference, I doubt that this was due to her actions
As for the last question, I think engaging children in such things is not a good idea because she has a little knowledge about the world
In my opinion, this is a very positive development. Most older people will share her opinion, but not everyone has the chance to talk about such great matters during such high-profile events. It is rare for a child at such a young age to speak on ecology in international issues. Few children are as brave and intelligent as our little heroine, but I am sure that children should be able to discuss issues at global levels. They will live after us and their future is uncertain.
2. Was her speech important at The UN Climate Summit?
Her words quickly became popular. Let's just ask ourselves, does it change anything? Everyone in politics says they will change the world. Even in Poland, we talk about the change of coal to nuclear energy, but for many decades this will not happen for various reasons. These words would have more meaning if they came from people who have a greater impact than this little girl.
3. Is it appropriate to allow children to discuss issues at the national and global level?
3. Some children are more intelligent than adults. The problem is that children do not have much idea about the swing of everyday life and knowing them is not taken very seriously.
I believe that children should be able to discuss issues at global level because sometimes ignorance of adults prevents the implementation of innovation.