(1887-1975), the first Director General of UNESCO, was a vocal Atheist who wrote against belief in God. To quote from his Religion without Revelation:
The supernatural is being swept out of the universe in the flood of new knowledge of what is natural. It will soon be as impossible for an intelligent, educated man or woman to believe in a god as it is now to believe the earth is flat, that flies can be spontaneously generated... or that death is always due to witchcraft... The god hypothesis is no longer of any pragmatic value for the interpretation or comprehension of nature, and indeed often stands in the way of better and truer interpretation. Operationally, God is beginning to resemble not a ruler but the last fading smile of a cosmic Cheshire cat. (Religion without Revelation, 1957)
It is important to understand that Julian Huxley defined UNESCO's purpose and philosophy
. Huxley wrote a paper with the title, UNESCO: Its Purpose And Its Philosophy
, downloadable from UNESCO's website.
He clearly defines that UNESCO "must serve the ends and objects of the United Nations, which in the long perspective are world ends, ends for humanity as a whole.
" (p.5) This paper really is a must read.
He states that human peace and security can only be achieved through humanism
. In particular saying that UNESCO "cannot base its outlook on one of the competing theologies of the world as against the others, whether Islam, Roman Catholoicism, Protestant Christianity, Buddhists, Unitarianism, Judaism, or Hinduism.
Huxley (UNESCO) believe such is only possible via "a world humanism, both in the sense of seeking to bring in all the peoples of the world...
". He goes onto define the true humanism that everyone should adopt as being a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background.
I'm just here going to quote from Huxley's paper – you decide how you feel about it:
One other item which Unesco should put on its programme as soon as possible is the study of the application of psycho-analysis and other schools of "deep" psychology to education. Though some repression into the unconscious seems to be indispensable if the human infant is to develop a normal moral sense and a full personality, yet it is equally obvious that over-strong or one-side repression is capable of producing various distortions of character and frustrations to full development, and notably a hypertrophied sense of sin which can be disastrous to the individual or to others. If we could discover some means of regulating the process of repression and its effects, we should without doubt be able to make the world both happier and more efficient. This would mean an extension of education backwards from the nursery school to the nursery itself. (UNESCO: Its Purpose And Its Philosophy, p.33)
Now UNESCO backs the IB programmes. They don't hide this. It is after all one of their projects which got wind under its wings and is found throughout many schools around the world. What other education programmes are they backing with the same weight? I am sure they do support others, but none that have had as much success as IBO's.
Guess what starting years that the IB PYP programme is aimed at? The IB Primary Years Programme (PYP) is a curriculum framework designed for students aged 3 to 12
IBO aims its programme at "students" aged as young as 3 years old. The school I moved my daughter from, who just became IB accredited, kicked out a C&K kindergarten
breaking their agreed lease, and now has a nursery of its own targeting these ages. And I'm equally sure it'll become PYP accredited also, if it didn't inherit such from already being accredited with higher years.
This says nothing to the sexual education programmes, but you know, I think the draft paper I presented provides insight into the thought and philosophy driving this "International" curriculum schools all over the world are taking up in droves. UNESCO and IBO have such a wide influence over schools and education all over the world, in the US, Australia and many other countries.