We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Global warming freezes the political class No doubt it must be global warming that has caused the most severe snowfall on the US capital in ninety years. I eagerly await an IPCC report on this!
I can only wonder if Dave Cameron actually reads the newspapers. The first rumbling of disquiet on his caring/sharing Green Tory-ism started last year and it is not too late to get rid of this half wit and replace him as leader of the Conservative Party with, well, a conservative.
Gah. Sorry, I think I just had a ‘brain displacement’… this is the Tories I am talking about! What was I thinking! The party that never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity! Silly me. Still… is it not enjoyable to watch the unravelling of an overarching global narrative?
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Global Warming: White fluffy stuff that falls from the sky.
Slight deviation from the topic, but on a theme…
At school, my 9 year old and his classmates are learning all about ranforests.
Part of his homework for the weekend is research: “Find as many reasons for the destruction of the rainforests as you can. Record them in an informative way“.
What an interesting question? What an open-minded teacher!
I have given him a handful of pointers: to raise a country out of poverty by export led growth; to clear land for industrialisation or habitation; to provide building materials; to clear land for farming.
His reply is that I have misunderstood the teacher’s instruction. He is supposed to be finding out why it has happened/is happening, not why it may be a Good Thing (TM).
He’s either too clever for me, or too indoctrinated! My explanation about eco-imperialism (why should we deny them the ability to enjoy western comforts?) was met with “if they all start to use computers and the internet, that’ll use lots of energy which will destroy the planet“.
Following our discussion he has therefore written this: “There is no reason for destroying the rainforests“.
I think I need to dig up Alvin Rabushka’s book (which I have lent out or lost or both) or Peter Bauer for some inspiration. Anyone any other ideas?
Nick.
UPDATE: Just remembered that Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist has a discussion on this issue. And my well-thumbed copy is in easy reach…
“if they all start to use computers and the internet, that’ll use lots of energy which will destroy the planet”
Well, it’s too late for that. They already have all started using computers and the internet. There are some really interesting trends out there: for instance, finding a cafe with free WiFi and lots of electrical outlets is much easier in (say) Hanoi than in (say) Frankfurt. We are regulating and bureaucratising our own economic dynamism out of existence.
The other obvious point is that using a computer and the internet isn’t especially energy intensive compared to a lot of other activities.
“The other obvious point is that using a computer and the internet isn’t especially energy intensive compared to a lot of other activities.”
It is, however, more energy-intensive than worshipping Gaea while starving in a hovel, which is what we are supposed to be doing.
Truth is that it seems to be patchy all over the globe with highs, lows and many storms. Something’s happening.
Yes, it is called “weather” 🙂
It should be outlawed.
[I]f they all start to use computers and the internet, that’ll use lots of energy which will destroy the planet.
That kid’s mastered the green agenda, all right: We have to keep Them poor. It’s for their own good, of course.
Nick – I was revising GCSE RE with my eldest last week and came across a statement categorically stating that “poverty” has got worse in the world since the Brandt report in 1980.
What can they mean? Bring back Carter and Callaghan!
It’s hard to know where to start deconstructing this argument, but I struggled to think of any measure at all where this was true.
My eldest is a bit autistic so I tried not to confuse him too much, but Parents’ Evening is going to be fun.
The true believers will rightly point out that there is a difference between climate and weather. They are of course correct but their argument will only hold up if cold winters become less and less common over the coming years.
I suppose it must have been around 1999 that my job required a trip to Scotland during winter. Emerging from my bed at the hotel and encountering overnight snowfall was something of a shock as I hadn’t seen snow for several years. The idea that snow in England was a thing of the past seemed quite credible then.
So is it climate, or just weather? Time will tell.
Regarding what can be done about David Cameron and the Tories.
Dan Hannan is too radical to lead the Conservatives, no doubt?
How did Margaret Thatcher get there? Did she promise to be a “good girl” and then got somewhat radical when she was elected?
And then messed it all up in the 90s, of course.
A Conservative Party led by Dan Hannan seems to be the best option for Britain?
There are some really interesting trends out there: for instance, finding a cafe with free WiFi and lots of electrical outlets is much easier in (say) Hanoi than in (say) Frankfurt. We are regulating and bureaucratising our own economic dynamism out of existence.
The more likely reason is that many more people in Frankfurt have electricity and internet in their homes, so they don’t need such access in a cafe.
Yes Mr Cameron and his staff (being cool P.R. cats) read the newspapers.
For example, they would have seen on the front page of the “Independent on Sunday” today how the evil globel warming “deniers” are corruptly funded by industry. Of coruse this is lie – but the truth or otherwise of the charge would not interest Mr Cameron and staff.
They would simply say to themselves “Independent says…..” before rushing off to see the “Up in the Air” Clooney film (yet another attack on evil American business) or the latest play “Enron” – because the BBC (and so on) says these films and plays are good.
The fact that the sort of person who buys the “Independent” (as opposed to just seeing it in a shop) or likes what the BBC broadcasts WOULD NOT VOTE CONSERVATIVE THIS SIDE OF HELL FREEZEING OVER (no pun on globel warming intended) does not occur to Mr Cameron or staff.
Even if suggested to them they would simply reply “the core vote approach failed”.
Of course it does not enter the minds of Cameron and co that MOST PEOPLE DID NOT BELIEVE that a Conservative party government would either cut taxes or get powers back from the E.U.
In short the elections since 1997 were not lost because the Conservative party was thought to be “too right wing” (the Cameron delusion) they were lost because the party of which I have been an active member of all my life were thought to be a dishonest bunch of shits.
Mr Cameron with such things as the breaking of his “iron pledge” to allow the people to vote on the E.U. Constitution (the so called “Lisbon Treaty”) has confirmed this pre existing impression.
It would be utterly astonishing if the Conservative party failed to defeat a Labour party that has messed everything up for 13 years (and which people are sick of) and is led by Gordon Brown – a man about as impressive as slug that someone has stepped on.
However, David Cameron (whose main objective is to be the darling of the BBC and the letters pages of the Independent and the Guardian – thus inducing Conservative minded people to stay home on election day) may just manage to pull defeat from the jaws of victory.
Just to wander further off topic:
I have a complete loathing of Lib Dems. However, my local MP, Susan Kramer, is one of few completely unscathed by the expenses scandal, and her opponent is eco-loon Zac Goldsmith. I came close to promising to vote for her to one of her campaigners (and haven’t seen any Tory ones).
What the deuce is going on? I actually attached a “no Lib Dems” sign to my doorbell last time round.
The other night I was watching the BBC News Channel.
Two of their reporters were discussing a new BBC poll on Climate Change.
According to the figures, the publics belief in AGW is plummeting. the vast majority of us now believe that if it is happening at all, then it has little or nothing to do with man. 25% dont believe it is happening at all.
Yet the two reporters were sat there asking each other the reason, with slack smiles of bemusement and disbelief on their faces.
“So what do you think the reason is Simon? Is it the stolen (they always say stolen) emails from the CRU? Is it the Glaciergate scandal from the IPCC?”
No I dont think so John (names made up as I cant remember them exactly), It could be that we have had a lot of snow lately and if you are digging out your car from a snowdrift it is hard to believe in the catastrophe that faces the world 50 years down the line”
“Simple as that?”
“Yes probably”
Grins of relief all around, now let’s get back to pumping out the propaganda.
The idiotic Cameroons think exactly the same. The Elite know best, we will just have to change the publics mind back again somehow.
If Cameron wanted to win with a landslide, first he would come out and say we are worried about all the dodgy science that seems to being uncovered here, so we will be doing nothing until we have thoroughly audited it.
Second, we will have a referendum on not only the Lisbon Treaty, but to stay in or leave the EU altogether.
Third we will be repealing the Human Rights Act and most of the legislation of the past 13 years as soon as we get into office.
The Tories would win so big, that like Elvis, damn near everyone wearing a red or orange tie, will have left the building.
But will he?
Ah there goes that squadron of Royal Wiltshire Saddlebacks, past my window again!
The impact of global warming is getting adverse day by day. the heavy snow fall is going to happen every year and blocking the streets every day…
I guess you missed the fact this snow is just like a snowfall 90 years ago. Was that also global warming?
As stated before – our friends with opposing views do say that “weather is not climate” when we have a very cold winter, yet this particular sentiment tends to be forgotten when we have a hot spell in the summer, or when it rains in the summer, or if anything happens at all in the summer.
RAB: heh, they may say it yet, if they thought it might win them a landslide. Would they actually do it afterwards?
Well in a word whOOps, No.
That’s why I’m not voting for the potato faced twat.
He is a Bliar by any other name.
Be careful lest, in a fit of “purity of thought”, you risk doing to Great Britain what his most recent Presidential Election is doing to the US …
Would McCain have been Reagan II ? Not in several geological eras …
Would McCain have been better than our current loon-in-chief ? At this point, more and mroe people are realising that the answer to that question is “Abso-$#$@-lutely!” … McCain would have been ‘significantly-less-bad’ at the very least …
Back in 1976, my lady wife voted proudly for Carter for President (in spite of my warning her that she would regret that vote) … by 1979, she was spontaneously saying how much she regretted the vote which had felt so reasonable at the time …
Cameron certainly doesn’t sound perfect – but even if he is *merely* significantly less bad than more years of the current Labour Government, that is already enough reason to support him … and I have yet to see anyone convincingly show that Cameron would not be at least ‘significantly-less-bad’ …
And, who knows ? The horse may learn to sing …
(h/t Leo Rosten, ‘Joys of Yiddish’)
Sorry Alisdair, I dont want significantly less bad, I want radically different, and Cameron isn’t either.He is exactly the bloody same as what we have now.
What would be the cost to come out and say we want a referendum on Europe?
The polls would soar in the Tories favour. The One eyed twat leading the blind would shit himself, and get very ad hominem nasty indeed (well he is already), and the Tories would walk it.
But Cameron wont will he?
The excuse given for the promise of a Ref on the Lisbon Treaty was…
Well it’s been ratified now hasn’t it? It would be all too complicated and pointless to unpick it now…
But we will be robust in renegotiating and getting back powers ceded to… Yadadayadayada…
No it fuckin wouldn’t! It would tell the EU just how we feel and that if they keep up the tide of shit legislation they keep forcing upon us,then we will ignore it(you know just like all the other EU members do when it is not in their National interest).
But Cameron wont even take that risk. Why? because he believes in the EU. He is a PR Man. He wants the position and status of being PM. He is not hurting for a bob or two and never has been, so he knows nothing, and feels nothing for the rest of us who are.
The fact that he will end up being the figurehead of a district council of the United States of Europe doesn’t matter to him, as long as he gets the accolades and the pension, oh probably, almost certainly a Lordship and more pension and power for no mandate after that is all he cares about, not us, or this once great country of ours.
You think these buffoons have learnt from the Expenses scandal? Not a bit of it!
If Bin Laden and his boys turned up with murder in their hearts at the opening of the next Parliament, I would first whip her Maj out the back door sharpish, cos she has done a blinding job over the years for this country, in the face of very hard circumstances, then hand them the keys and let them do their worst.
We need to clear out the entire lot of the fuckers and start again from scratch!
Nope. Nothing I have seen has changed my views on that on iota since I wrote this… and the Tea Party movement’s attitude towards the Republican establishment indicates I am far from alone in thinking that.
Perry, I send you postcards from the apocalypse that is the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington DC:
http://vulgarmorality.wordpress.com/2010/02/06/postcards-from-the-apocalypse/
In my spare time between shoveling out, my thoughts have naturally turned to global warming. Find it interesting that the UK press is, at last, all over the demise of both the politics and the science of this issue – here in the US, it’s crickets chirping in the silence.
http://vulgarmorality.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/climategate-and-the-ideology-of-news/
Perhaps someone could persuade Cameron to look at what’s happening here in Australia. Before December last year, our Liberal Party (the name for our Conservative Party) was going along with KRuddy Labor. Then there was an internal revolt, Turnbull was replaced with anti-ETS Tony Abbott, and suddenly the government looks in trouble! It’s not a complete turnaround in the polls, but it’s tapping into a flood of discontent about Climategate, and other climate-related policies!
The snowfall was clearly organised by Big Oil
Cameron will not be changing his mind (or what passes for one) any time soon Nuke. He has bought into the scam hook line and sinker.
This, the man who bought a windmill for his roof that is about as effective as one he could of got at a beachside gift shop to amuse his kids, and a bloody sight more expensive.
Plus he thinks Zak Goldsmith is one of his new and rising stars (a likely backdoor source of funding for the Tories, more like).
Nope, business as usual for the AGW lobby if Potato head wins.
Actually, the extra snow was stolen from Canada, just so they’d look bad for the Winter Olympics! Give it back, you spoilsport Yankees!
Like many other people I did what I could for John McCain – but inspite of almost total leftist control of the msm and the education system (both schools and colleges – for those who say “those under 18 do not vote” and assume that everyone totally recovers from a decade or so of cultural and political brainwashing as soon as they graduate school) a single person’s efforts made the defeat of John McCain unavoidable.
That person was not Barack Obama – that person was JOHN MCCAIN.
It was not just stupid debate things like saying Warren B. (an Obama supporter) would make a good Treasury Sec it was BASIC POLICY JUDGEMENTS.
At al time when the vast majority of the voters opposed TARP (and the rest of the multi TRILLION Dollar bailouts by the Tresuary and the Fed) John McCain ENDORSED the policy.
“So did Barack Obama” – his voters were cultists, it did not matter how he voted. But McCain had a chance to break with Bush and live up to his own record of resisting wild spending (one of the few things that McCain was actually good on).
And John McCain threw that chance to lead a popular groundswell against TARP away – it was the only time I have ever seen tears in the eyes of Dick Morris (I did not think that corrupt pol, as he describes himself, was capable of such emotion – but he was so FRUSTRATED with John McCain’s lack of a political sense).
Even Sarah Palin does not appear to understand – for example in her book, the lady says that the first vote (where the Republicans voted against TARP) sent a bad message – that Republicans did not care.
TOTALLY WRONG – ALMOST INSANELY WRONG.
The people were demanding that Congress not follow the elite political class – the vast majority of voters wanted TARP blown to Hell.
McCain/Palin could have ridden that wave to a landslide victory.
Instead they throw away their only chance to win – and made the efforts of everyone who tried to help them a waste of time.
As for “if McCain had won…..”
Glenn Beck has a reply to this (the same as Perry’s likely reply).
Under advice from the “great and the good” (the media and the academics) John McCain would go along with the Progressive agenda (which J. D. Haywood would not, by the way).
The great difference would have been – IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE TO ORGANIZE A TEA PARTY MOVEMENT AND SO ON AGAINST A PRESIDENT MCCAIN.
Conservatives and libertarians would have been helpless against the media line.
“You have got a Republican President supporting X, Y, Z, indeed a Republican with a record of fiscal conservativism (not one earmark in his entire time in the Senate) supported X, Y, Z, – so only a real extremist can oppose any of this stuff”.
“But Paul – now we have a Marxist as President, do you not understand how dangerious that is not just for America but for the West as a whole?”
Yes I do understand the danger and, like millions of others of people, I did all I could to prevent it – John McCain let everyone down (with his support for TARP) and that should not be forgotten.
Now we are where we are – we must organize mass peaceful education and political dissent.
My other post will turn up in due time.
By the way – if anyone thinks that a President McCain would have prevented Cap and Tax they are deluding themsleves.
Indeed such a policy suggested by a President McCain would have been harder (much harder) to stop than Cap and Tax suggested by a President Obama.
Vulgar Moralist, I just saw your postcards from the apocalypse. Deep snow is lovely, in photos. You remind me why I now live in the South.
“Sam” appears to be a drive by comment person.
Pity – I was hopeing to ask him about his support for nuclear power.
After all as he is a believer in the doctrine of human C02 emission caused climate change he of course, like James “Gaia man” Lovelock gives great support to nuclear power.
It would be interesting if “Sam” turned out not to give great support to nuclear power.