In my last post I noted reasons why I simply can't roll over and accept the position of the ecofascist lobby when it comes to climate change. Truth be told, I do believe that some climate change is happening which is a difference from what I might have said a few years ago but I remain convinced that it is a natural piece of environmental evolution, that humanity isn't contributing significantly to it and that the best response to climate change is to adapt to it.
Despite all the evidence supporting this position the ecofascists are having none of it. Over and over again they shout that mankind is the worst thing to ever happen to the planet and that radical changes to reduce carbon utilization are necessary to prevent a global catastrophe. Self delusion might be one explanation but I think there's another that needs to be considered.
The history of the world is full of great powers that sought out domination over others. Since the rise of Islam in 600 it has engaged in an ongoing international conflict with Chrisianity for religious and territorial domination, a conflict that subsided into the background during the 20th century after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of international communism. For those following events around the globe this conflict is slowly regaining predominance even if the Chrisian side doesn't realize or want to accept it yet.
During the 20th century the grand global conflict was between capitalism, as championed by the West, and communism as championed by the Soviet Union and China. Communism was not a benign economic philosophy, not in the least. It was and is a malignant poltical ideology that seeks, as its ideal, to place as much of the globe as possible under totalitarian rule with tools like thought control and other Orwellian devices to ensure the unwashed masses remain in line. The West, and America especially with its believe in the free market, free press and free speech were the enemies of this ideology and had to be crushed.
Unfortunately for communism its representatives in the late 20th century weren't very good at propagating this aim. Unlike the glory days until Stalin, y"sh, leaders like Mikhail Gorbachev were better at being petty totalitarians. China's leaders today might call themselves communist but are robber baron capitalists in fact and deed. Communism, for its devout adherents, is on life support. Even the kibbutzim have mostly abandoned their Marxists origins and function today and profit-making collectives.
In fact the only real drive left of communism is a vitriolic hatred of the West and capitalism. The same folks who once believed the Soviet Union to be the ideal society for everyone still hate what America once stood much better for. They may not wave the hammer and sickle anymore but their efforts to undermine freedom in the West continued unabated.
One of the places these miscreants have gathered to continue their war is in the ecofascist lobby. One doesn't have to follow the news carefully to note that the ecofascists focus on only one part of the world when they talk about the coming ecological armageddon and who is responsible for it: the West.
Consider the Kyoto accord, for example. Its protocols were designed to force industrialized countries to reduce their carbon output to certain levels in order to slow the pace of global warming. The United States failed to fully ratify the protocols and was roundly criticized for that. What ecofascists fail to note, however, is that almost no signatory to the accord accomplished what they pledged to do. Everyone's carbon emissions went up significantly. In fact the United States was the country that made the most progress in slowing the rise in emissions despite not being a signatory. Despite that they continued to be criticized for not being part of the Kyoto accord.
Kyoto was also ridiculous for introducing the concept of carbon credits. The idea was that an underdeveloped country in the middle of Africa would not reach the minimum carbon targets because its industrial lack of output kept it well below them. It could sell this leeway to industrialized countries which then could apply the credits to their "progress report". Hence Russia, with its oil wealth, bought multiple credits that obviated their need to do anything to reduce their carbon outputs! If Kyoto was a serious process wouldn't they be interested in everyone reducing their carbon, not set up a trading process to allow continued carbon production?
Finally, China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters never bothered to join the Kyoto protocols. Anyone familiar with those two countries can tell you that they are industrializing at a rapid pace with minimum control over the amount of smog they produce. Yet it was Canada, which produces less than 3% of global carbon emissions, that got pilloried when it pulled out of the Kyoto accord after realizing it would never meet its obligations.
So a treaty that no signatory was compliant with, which gave mechanisms to avoid real change and which did not include two of the worst polluters on the planet, neither of which happen to be Western countries. And who's the worst offender? Well America and Canada (with our oil sands) of course!
One would think that with all the evidence that the industrialized world isn't going to cut its carbon emissions and that the the non-industrialized world is struggling to catch up the ecofascist lobby would consider a different approach, one in which humanity works to accomodate inevitable climate change. But that's not the case. We have Neil Young, for example, singing about the oil sands and comparing them to Hiroshima. I wanted so hard to be his biggest fan after he announced he was going to play a concert in Israel and then this happened. Hey Neil, how are you getting to Israel? By canoe?
The eceofascist lobby's goal isn't to stop global warming. It simply can't do it and besides, with the tactics that its using it's clearly not interested in achieving that. The lobby instead is interested in eating into the freedoms that made the West prosperous and victorious over communism. David Suzuki, for instance, believes that politicians (and presumable scientists and other influential folks) who don't accept his version of climate change ideology should be jailed. How's that for the free exchange of ideas? Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who refuses to buy into the ecofascist lobby's ideology is constantly villified for his insistently on independent thought.
The ecofascists want a big government that will micromanage our affairs and control our thoughts and speech, all in the name of an overarching ideology that in practice will not lead anywhere. Where have we seen this before?
As the Beatles sang, "Back in the USSR!"