Bread & circuses.

THE classroom crusade to train little eco-warriors first became apparent to me six years ago when our youngest son, then in the second grade, began scolding the family about mixing paper and plastic, running "unnecessary" errands in the car, and being inadequately concerned about dying species around the globe. Although attending a Catholic school, he was shaky on the cardinal virtues -- but he rose up in wrath when he spotted an environmental offense. I was grateful there was no Environmental Bureau handy. We were raising a potential informer.

At age 13 John now enjoys a clearer view -- and a different school. But most American schoolchildren are being indoctrinated about our doomed planet and urged to take political action on the basis of faulty science.

In the Fifties, lessons on climate, animals' habitats, and natural resources were scientifically sound, if simplified, and might be complemented by a poster contest on the theme "Don't Be a Litterbug." In the Eighties, a nine-year-old ended her letter to President Bush by writing, "Mr. President, if you ignore this letter we will all die of pollution and the ozone layer."

In their new book, Facts Not Fear, A Parent' Guide to Teaching Children About the Environment, Michael Sanera and Jane S. Shaw detail the disinformation about ecological disasters routinely taught in schools. The authors reviewed 130 earth- science textbooks, 170 environmental books for children, and related curriculum materials from environmental and business groups. They conclude: "Unbiased materials are a rare exception. Most materials either present only one side of an issue, select worst-case examples, or omit important information."

Children are taught that plastic is bad, the ozone layer is being destroyed, wildlife is disappearing, billions face starvation, and melting polar ice caps will cause New York City to be submerged so that "only the tops of tall buildings will be above the water." The primary villains are economic growth, technology, and the United States. Children fed these apocalyptic visions indict their parents as shoddy stewards of the environment.

And parents plead guilty. A few years ago the New York Times ran a story about parents harassed by their "eco-smart" kids. One mother confessed that as soon as her little eco-warrior left for camp, she threw a few bottles in the trash. "I guess now I'm rebelling against Jacob's sternness," she explained. Other parents complained about having to hide plastic wrapping, aerosol cans, and diet soda. It is pleasing to see the "question authority" generation (Jacob's parents met at a 1961 Washington Square peace rally) living under pint-sized dictators. But polls show that many parents form their own views on the environment based on what their children tell them.

Radical environmentalists moved in on the schools because they understood this. In 1972, one professor, who had designed a "Rachel Carson Project," suggested to his fellow educators: "Perhaps the best way to encourage the new [environmental] ethic through formal education is to pervade the culture of the school, subtly but powerfully, rather than establish a single new course." The author of the best-selling book 50 Simple Things Kids Can Do to Save the Earth tells children, "Kids have a lot of power. Whenever you say something, grown-ups have to listen. . . . So if saving the Earth is important to you, then grown-ups will have to follow along."

Not only parents but also politicians are the targets of this kid power. Jonathan Adler of the Competitive Enterprise Institute points out that an increas- ing number of educational materials explicitly urge political action. "Children are told to write letters to Congress, draft petitions, and boycott products that are not deemed politically correct." Popular cartoons and toys also promote the radicals' agenda. Adler points out that the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are "repeatedly telling children to 'write to your government at every level -- city, county, state, and federal."' G.I. Joes now do battle with a figure called "CEO Cesspool," who seeks world domination in order to spread his toxic waste.

SANERA and Shaw don't merely decry the dismal state of environmental education. In a clear and readable format, they provide sound science to refute the phony eco-facts contained in most textbooks. Parents armed with Facts Not Fear can see that their own children are well informed, and receptive teachers might be given a copy and invited to question what they've been teaching their students. But millions of children will remain indoctrinated soldiers in the environmental wars.

More than thirty states mandate curriculum requirements on the environment, and the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Education provides schools with materials that contradict their own studies on the environment. Unfortunately, such miseducation enjoys bi-partisan support. Adler reports that "Too many Republicans want to promote environmental education because they see it as a free vote to burnish their green credentials." Even Sen. Jim Inhofe (R., Okla.), a solid conservative, is a chief sponsor of federal legislation that promotes the ongoing indoctrination of students.

Sanera's own educational efforts led to reforms in Arizona's environmental curriculum. A new law mandates that instruction must be based on current scientific information and include discussion of economic implications. Behavior modification and the promotion of political activity are expressly forbidden. Most Republican legislatures and governors, however, have shown little interest in such "controversial" reforms.

But Sanera reports that his book has struck a nerve. "Every parent has a story, and, having been unchallenged for 25 years, the environmentalists are beginning to be put on the defensive."

Until politicians work up the political courage to call for an end to this educational abuse, parents might try a little harassing of their own. Don't eco-brats realize that Nintendo games and television have plastic components, and waste energy?