The New And Improved Apocalypse.

The Beast is forty-five years old and, consequently, he remembers quite clearly that point in recent history when the worldwide socialist movement imploded, taking along with it the hopes and dreams of multitudes of Euro-hippie peaceniks.

As the old adage goes; “watch what you ask for, you may get it!”. The gettee’s in 1990-92 were the Anti-War, Anti-Nuke crowd who had spent the previous thirty years flying kites for peace and stood aghast when most of the worldwide communist/socialist governments they idolized abruptly folded their Gulags and went home. Apart from the initial flush of victory at the sight of assorted German Hippies sitting astride the Berlin wall (you could tell the East Germans from the West by the fact that the westerners were wearing grungier clothing), once the festivities ended they were forced to confront the fact that without a Berlin Wall, what were lefty pop singers like

Nena

going to fly their “Neun Und Neunzig Luftbalons” over? Burger King?

One could argue that it’s difficult-bordering-on-impossible to conduct a vigorous anti-war campaign without an actual war to campaign against. The dangling damoclean sword of nuclear war, death and devastation gave Euro Lefties a reason to get out of bed in the morning – what were they going to do now, Get a job? Worse still, those whose job WAS fighting against Nuclear War saw their livelihoods threatened. In the forty years since the end of the second world war, western leftists had erected a vast economic and political edifice devoted to battling the (predominantly American) political doctrine of “Containment” of a Communist economic/political franchise that offered peace and equality with a liberal dollop of hideous repression. With this franchise defunct, where was the grant money going to come from?

Obviously the Left needed a new home.

Enter environmentalism. Once the bastard child of leftist political causes; it was one of many tools employed to club developed nations for their messy successes. With the socialists now rudderless and adrift, could enviroes provide a safe harbor while the left reorganized? Obviously, yes.

But there was a problem. The meme “we will all drown in our wastes” was simply not as sexy as “we will all perish in nuclear fire”. Of course everyone wanted clean air and water, but those could be accomplished without a massive reorganization of the world economy (re: de-privatization of industry, wealth redistribution) and the solutions were kind of wonkish and boring. Without a ghastly immediate threat there was no excuse to take drastic immediate political measures. Something was going to have to be done about that, and soon. Fortunately, the solution had been in development for several years, it was called “Global Warming”.

In 1989, British science documentarian James Burke produced a two-part special for PBS called “After The Warming”. Set in the year 2050, after global warming has messed up the planet in spectacular fashion, it pretends to look back at all the warning signs that humanity missed. The first half is a mix of science, history and speculation with the requisite desert and flood scenes. Standard fare these days, what’s more interesting is how he saves us all in the second half.

This scheme is aptly described in the following excerpt from the June, 1997 issue of The Energy Advocate’s article: James Burke’s Horror Story – (Wherein Burke Conducts a Post-Mortem on the Earth)

In his fantasy, Burke manages to survive his imagined horrors to become the narrator of his tale. It takes no less than the Planetary Management Authority (PMA) with powers that only Stalin could love. An upper limit on carbon burning is established. The US would use up its allocation before long, but may buy “carbon credits” from Chad or Angola in exchange for advanced technology that will enable third-world countries to “leapfrog past fossil fuel use” into a solar future. Of course, the advanced countries, from whence all this wisdom comes, somehow don’t use this wonderful technology to save their civilization.

UP with the PMA! Energy Taxes! Slap massive charges onto anybody driving into the city! Mandatory family planning! Use energy taxes to pay for mass (that is, bulk) transit!

“By 2002, the world had decided to go all out for renewable energy. _ The media campaign had worked.”

How BRILLIANT! Centralized control of the global economy! Massive redistribution of wealth away from the developed nations and down to the third world! Taxes galore! The establishment of a socialist worker’s paradise!

This Global Warming thing was perfect – it would fill the hole left by the loss of Nuclear War, providing a new apocalypse to justify the same old sweeping social and economic changes. We were all going to die once again, and once again socialism would save us!

Look at some of these 1989 solutions – any seem familiar in 2007? How about massive charges on “anybody driving into the city”? It’s already happened, has it not? How about Kyoto-style “carbon credits”? And how about the tradeoffs – Burke has the world switching over to clean renewable energy, but none of it turns out to be nuclear or hydro because…well, just because.

It’s important to understand this wholesale movement of “red” politics to “green” was not a conspiracy; it was more like a migration of animals away from a dry waterhole to a full one. The peace crowd no longer had the threat of nuclear war to use as leverage to argue that the Western world needed to coddle the Communist world or be blown up – the Communist world was gone.

Sometimes the most informative part of a debate is not what’s being said, but rather what’s not being said. One has to wonder why the “solutions” to Global Warming dovetail so nicely into a one hundred-plus year old worldwide socialist political agenda that was established long before carbon emissions ran amok? even assuming Global Warming is real and caused by us, is it not possible to combat the phenomenon using non-marxist policies? Why are we accepting these solutions as writ?

It is no suprise that now we are being told the debate is closed; Man-made Global Warming is a fact and if you have any questions about that you should just shut up or you’ll be in big trouble. Yet the United Nations’ latest report on global warming has backpedaled on all the major predictions it made in the past. Rising sea levels have gone from a predicted three feet in 1990 (by 2100) to a predicted high of seventeen inches. According to computer models the world was supposed to have warmed significantly in the last ten years, but according to the U.S. National Climate Data Center, the world in 2006 was only 0.03 degrees warmer than it was in 2001. That’s within the margin of error, so it’s basically nothing. The oceans have actually cooled. Also gone is the infamous “Hockey Stick” graph purporting to show level climate temperatures over the previous 900 years, followed by a sharp spike in the last 100. It left out a few details, such as The Medieval Warm period (half a millennium of temperature higher than now) and The Little Ice Age that followed after it ended. Yet there will be no debate.

While it is indisputable that global temperatures have increased somewhat in the last 100 years, the question of whether it’s our fault is not settled. So one must wonder why Global Warming advocates work so hard and so punitively to end debate? Perhaps it’s because they need it to be true so they can resurrect a socio-economic agenda that failed in the political marketplace a decade ago but which might now succeed by simply swapping the labels.

Advertisements

9 Comments

  1. frothingatlemouse
    Posted February 5, 2007 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

    Hey, just pop some gardasil in there and you’ve got globally warming pap smears.

  2. Posted February 6, 2007 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    Okay Beasty: if your GP told you there was an 90% chance that you had some nasty disease, would you do something about it, or would you ask him to stop wasting your time, until he has something a little more definite to tell you?

    But lets not dwell on the *probability* figures, which are all premised on the BLAME GAME. That’s MY bug-bear. BLAME.

    If there was (and there is) near and present climate change, seemingly set to get worse, probably caused by penguins, we’d go shoot the penguins, as a precaution. We’d then still have to deal with the consequences of having had penguins on the planet for too darned long. So we’d set about adapting to whatever will come, and this would vary significantly for every country. The fact that most countries didn’t have penguins in the first place wouldn’t let them off the hook, nor would sitting around saying “it’s all YOUR fault” to the countries that promoted their penguins as a tourist attraction.

    What I’m trying to say is: things are going to change, we will need to adapt, no matter where the “blame” lies, that is, even IF it’s a “natural” cycle of some sort (and ain’t THAT a long bow to draw), things will still need to be “done”, by us humans.

    Of course, if it is carbons and methane causing a lot of this, the worst will hit long after we are gone. Right now, we are, likely, seeing the consequences of emissions from a few decades ago, when they were much lower. Even at our current levels, you don’t even want to think about the consequences for the generations we’ll be leaving behind.

    I definitely agree with you about green being the new red. It’s so flippin’ obvious isn’t it? But the socialists have never been a subtle lot. Pity they’ve never been any good at delivering any of the promised utopias though. But then they love nothing more than catastrophe and doom-saying; it’s their bliss, their reason for being.

  3. Posted February 6, 2007 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Caz,

    The Beast chooses his own GP, not one foisted off upon him (no socialized medicine in America) and when this GP gives health advice The Beast tends to believe him because The Beast knows that the GP is not operating under any ulterior motives.

    Man-Made Global Warming science is lousy with such motives – it is an ideological pack mule for the Left wing, who spoke of it seventeen years ago in exactly the SAME ringing tones of certainty (with no science yet) as they do now. Furthermore, the dire predictions made at the time have not yet come close to happening. The planet has cooled over the past ten years – most of the temp spikes happened in the 90’s. Even now the predictions are being scaled back by about 50% every 4-5 years. What will they be in 2010? Sea rise of 6 inches by 2100? Who cares about that?

    Did you see the story last week about the Weather Channel’s Global Warming Show host who called for decertifying all meteorologists who deny Man-Made Global Warming? Know why she wants that? Well, first, there are almost NO professional Meteorologists who think this is happening, therefore second, they threaten her living. If the science is so rock-solid why are critics being threatened with lawsuits, job loss or worse for continuing the debate? People who have the facts on their side don’t act this way, but people who see their livelihoods threatened DO.

    Our last warming cycle (1000 – 1500 A.D., acheived without carbon emissions and warmer then than we are now) ended in an ice age. The Beast suspects that this Ice Age was a lot harder to live with than the five hundred years of warmth prior. And the idea that weather is cyclical is not a long bow to draw at all – it is axiomatic. Occam’s razor would suggest that in a world which goes through periodic temperature fluctuations as a matter of course over millions of years (in which humans were not here) the idea that THIS time it’s our fault is downright silly. It may be true but it is not settled.

    The Beast understands that Australia in the summer is a hot place to live. It is currently -5 degrees fahrenheit in New England, and North America is seeing the coldest winter in years after a mild start in the east. The western half of the US has been frigid since november – snow in Malibu, avalanches in colorado. Know what we’ve been saying?

    “We could use some Global Warming right now!”

    Thanks for your comment.

    THB

  4. Posted February 6, 2007 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    How about this weather, Tom? 😉 There are more influences that global warming have on planetary climate that include colder winters as well as hotter summers…look for this trend to continue, as the scientists have pretty much thrown down the gauntlet on this issue which is just as important as prosecuting those who deny the Holocaust. (Interesting parallel, huh?)

  5. Posted February 6, 2007 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    BTW…I’m so glad you thought to post the Deutch version of “99 Red Balloons” hadn’t seen that one in a while.

  6. Posted February 6, 2007 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    jeremiah,

    Yes every kind of weather can be blamed on Global Warming, which is what makes it so useful. The Beast read a great post on this subject written by E. on the website http://www.constitutionclub.com which he will quote:

    Most proponents of climate change point to literally any weather occurance to prove their point: too many hurricanes? yep. Too few hurricanes? yep. Drought? of course. Lots of rain? yep. Lots of snow and cold? yep. Breezy mediterranean weather in mid May on the coast of Marseilles, France? Oui. You see, all are symptoms of the problem.

    As for the Nena youtube video – The Beast recommends you play it as you read his post, it makes a great theme song.

  7. Caz
    Posted February 7, 2007 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    Hmmm – so, your theory is not about the left going green, it’s about the conspiracy of scientists across the world, who have a collective agenda and ulterior motive?

    Come on Beasty, you don’t really believe a few thousand scientist all vote left, or all got together to conspire?

    Don’t forget, it’s “climate change” – more volatile and more extremes, rather than global warming!

  8. Posted February 7, 2007 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    caz,

    The Beast addresses the “consensus” issue in the next post. It is not a conspiracy – you will see why.

    But here is a hint: according to a story coming out today, the state of Washingon wants to fire their climatologist. Why?

    He doesn’t think global warming is man-made.

    Message to all the rest: if you want to keep your jobs, BELIEVE.

    Or shut up.

  9. Posted April 25, 2007 at 7:57 am | Permalink

    Thank You


Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: