This week, a short video of British primary school children caused quite a stir amongst the politically and philosophically minded who blog, tweet or interact online in some other way.  

Whilst parents are CRB checked, stripped of their cameras and closely supervised for signs of abusive tendencies in the school environment (all this despite the extended services rhetoric of community hubs and lifelong learning), for as long as the filming equipment is brandished by an anoymous state official, it is acceptable for it to be pointed at the brainwashed faces of other people's children.

The 4 or 5 minute clip showed a teacher introducing the study topic of "famous black people from the past and the present" before the children went on to perform a rap in praise of Diane Abbott, the first black woman MP. The vigour with which this video was circulated online was matched only by the speed with which it was removed. From YouTube, then here, and most outrageously of all from Diane Abbott's own website, where all references to this sycophantic snippet have now vanished.

Despite assurances to the contrary, the teaching of politics in state schools can never be truly objective. A curriculum will likely cover the traditional left/right political spectrum but it is unlikely that it will offer rigorous analysis or exploration of the biggest question that surely arises: whether the compulsory imposition of a political system upon us renders the "choices" within that system, regardless of political colour, as nothing more than an opportunity to vote for greater or lesser evil to be enacted.

A school that relies on the political system for funding will find it difficult to teach its pupils about freedom and personal responsibility. Even whilst disagreeing with politicians on surface issues, many teachers will not question the real status quo. They will continue to justify their own existence and the existence of schools through the covert or unconscious presentation and manipulation of information. The NASUWT (a teaching union whose position is that parents should not have the right to make alternative arrangements to school provision) is a supreme example of aggressive self interest in action, without due regard to logic and consistency.

For as long as parents are aware of this (and perhaps we have reached a generation where many are not) then they can risk being labelled "non-compliant" by ensuring that their children are intellectually and emotionally innoculated against the worst of what school has to offer. A slog indeed, but undoubtedly worthwhile when independent, critically minded and honourable individuals are the end result.

But when the indoctrination is so overt, then parents really have no choice but to ask themselves what has been allowed to happen over the last decade or so. The video clip, now deleted, is a sober reflection of several strands: shoddy teaching; a belief that children are infinitely less capable than they really are; a clear shift from teaching duties to parental responsibilities. There is a link to the audio below, thank you Su, so please take 5 minutes to listen to the rap and the short question and answer session at the end:

Diane Abbott Rap.mov (5.24 mb)

It's a fact that Diane Abbott is a woman. She is black. She was the first woman MP. But these facts have been supplemented with subjective value statements masquerading as fact. And for as long as that happens, then these children will never learn (from school, at least) to think:

Here are some more facts: Diane Abbott is a left wing politician. She sent her child to a private school. She thinks that "blonde, blue eyed Finnish girls" are unsuitable as NHS nurses because they might never have met a black person. She failed to declare BBC earnings in 2004 and was forced to make a public apology.

She is "for" tackling underachievement, but she doesn't trust the government with her own child. She is "for" equality, but she circumvents the system she helps to build and displays racist attitudes. She is "for" assuming power over other people, but she does not show integrity in her own conduct.

By her own admission, she is not rational, logical or consistent. She does not live her stated values. She can never influence policy in a manner that will satisfy all of her constituents. And yet she is happy to be the final arbiter of what is "right" for other people - despite knowing that it is impossible to compromise the welfare of your own child for the sake of an incoherent political ideology.

And so it goes that irrational, illogical and inconsistent people continue to enjoy the power to decide what is right for you, your family and your children - whether you agree with their decision or not. In the final analysis, the "choice" granted to you by the political system is irrelevant if you're the next target of their "support" and intervention. And if you want to teach your children this truth, then you might find yourself labelled by the authorities as an unsuitable parent. See how it works, yet?

That's a real lesson for those school children. Put down your photographs of Diane Abbott, step away from the teacher who is spoonfeeding you nonsense, and walk out of your classroom into the real world. A real world where public transport and help for the elderly and support for the underachieving does not come courtesy of Diane Abbott's largesse, or a benevolent government, but from the pockets of all of those parents who have little choice but to put their children into this system (whilst they earn the money to pay the taxes to feed the system) for as long as the government lives and breathes.

Update: Video link has been restored. Thanks to Rantin Rab.