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]
|
Samizdata quote of the day What would cutting Canada’s emissions in half really look like? Which schoolbuses and fire trucks would Mulcair say we shouldn’t use any more? Which farms will be shut down? Which factories? (Has Mulcair he told his union friends about that last part?)
Mulcair’s plan will cripple our country without changing the world’s temperature one degree. Because as the UN IPCC itself admits, even if every country in the world obeyed the Kyoto Protocol, including China, it would not change the temperature of the world by 1/100th of one degree, even after 100 years.
These cap and trade schemes are really about deindustrializing the West, and crippling capitalism and progress.
– Ezra Levant
|
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.
|
And yet the people of Canada look set to vote for the socialist NDP and (basically the same) Liberals.
Canada has many problems – but they will all be made worse by the higher government spending and endless regulations – “environmental” and other.
It is difficult not to despair.
It is always problematic to infer other people’s motivations; or in fact even our own motivations, since we are all very clever about deceiving ourselves.
In this case, however, it seems likely that the real intent is not de-industrialization but an increase in the power of the ruling class (though that is effectively the same as crippling capitalism).
Global Warming is a hoax and a useful one. The man who made it famous, Al Gore, in addition to lying about climate with the now totally debunked “hockey stick’ climate graph also told the world he invented the internet. Nice trick as that research was started under President Eisenhower’s ARPA in the Defense Department in 1953. Mr. Gore was 5 years old at the time.
The head of the Sierra Club was grilled by Senator Cruz recently in Senate testimony. This man was a total dunce who knew nothing about climate. He responded just a Communists do: Talking point lies and nothing else. A parrot actually would have been more believable.
When Communism was shown to be a total failure the left needed a new device; the environment was their choice and it works perfectly. Pay a ‘scientist’ a million or so and they will say anything. Then pay (2) other scientists a few hundred thousand to “peer review” the first scientists bullshit and you can put a stop to virtually any economic activity in the name of the ‘people’ and the ‘environment’. Lenin, Stalin and Hitler should of thought of this. They might have actually succeeded with their scams.
Anyway watch Senator Cruz tear Aaron Muir a new asshole:
http://therightscoop.com/briliant-watch-ted-cruz-destroy-sierra-club-president-on-climate-change/
It’s difficult to take these sorts of plans seriously. A plan that puts the pain off for fifteen years, when some other politician is in office, will never be implemented. Mulcair’s goal, of course, is to make voting for him feel righteous for large numbers of people. In that he will probably succeed.
I have three sisters. All have a university education; all have HDS (Harper Derangement Syndrome). They would be considered to be among the elite. They all are professionals as are their husbands. They bray against any perceived administrative outrage committed by the current government and yet they are contentiously promoting their elevation to the socialist ruling class.
They seriously believe that they know best. About everything.
I cannot reach them. They love Obama, they love Mulcair, they love Trudeau, they love May. It’s ANYBODY BUT HARPER!
But why? They cannot articulate; other than to say that he doesn’t represent “their Canada” or “the Canadian Way”.
One despairs for the future of the country.
“These cap and trade schemes are really about deindustrializing the West, and crippling capitalism and progress.”
CoughCoughBullshitCough.
Could this be another attempt to just be different to their neighbour down south? If they embrace too much free enterprize and capitalism, won’t they be sucked into the USofA? (Perhaps that could be the name of all those States- Tusofa!)
John Galt 3.0, indeed.
Cap -n- Trade is nothing more complicated than putting 3rd world nations (presuming they’re all currently “developing” is a bit presumptuous) on world wide dole, at the expense of 1st world nations. And like all dole systems, it’s ostensibly a “redistribution” from the rich to the poor when it’s really a distribution from the rich to government, with government giving a maintenance pittance to the now crushingly dependent. The 3rd world nations would even be paid to NOT develop. That’s evil.
“What would cutting Canada’s emissions in half really look like? Which schoolbuses and fire trucks would Mulcair say we shouldn’t use any more? Which farms will be shut down? Which factories? (Has Mulcair he told his union friends about that last part?)”
These questions are not difficult. The answer for all of them is, “ones which will not adversely affect his, or his friends, lifestyles.” See how simple that is?
Canada will do the world a favour if they vote to destroy their own way of life because only when it really hits home what this all means will people in general come to terms with their own stupidity.
A question I ask myself regularly is: “Is there a point at which people will notice that climate insanity is actually having a negative effect on their lives?”
And by ‘notice’ I mean to the point where they put their foot down and say: “NO!”
I’m not convinced there is. Which means the Doomsdayers will win.
My only hope is, paradoxically, the brainwashed young. They have grown up, socialist to the core, unaware that the world of products, services and freedoms that they live in was made by capitalism and markets. We know that socialism can’t provide those things so they will run out. My intuition is that when they start to be limited by Govt fiat in the name of Gaia, the selfish generation will riot for their iPhones, cheap flights and X-boxes.
Green will become very very uncool very quickly. And that will be it’s death.
Stuck Record: I am not convinced that climate insanity will ever have a noticeable impact on the economy, as long as there are votes at stake.
See also Eric’s comment above:
John Galt III that is an excellent video. Quite uncomfortable to watch, in fact.
Don’t forget “wealth transfer” – the IPCC’s insistence on “diversity” over competence in it’s scientists leads to that outcome, inevitably. The UN is the third-worlder’s playground.
Paul Marks:
Though the Liberals in Canada talk a good leftist game, in practice they generally govern much like the Conservatives — progressive, but not hard left like the NDP. The worst case (plausible) scenario is a Liberal minority, because then they won’t be able to govern without sucking up to the NDP.
Nicholas Gray:
Canada has actually been moving away from freedom more slowly than the U.S. for quite some time now. For example, in the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom Canada ranks 6th in the world whereas the U.S. ranks 12th. The U.S. has been slipping and Canada rising for about a generation. (Though it’s important to understand that Canada’s “rise” is really the product of other countries declining.) That trend was arguably started by the former Progressive Conservative party, but it was also sustained by the Liberals for a decade.
Richard Quigley:
Don’t forget that there are a boatload of shy tories in Canada. Those people not expressing an opinion? They have a non reactionary-prog-left opinion, and are probably planning to vote Conservative. I’ve scarcely expressed a political opinion in person to anyone but my wife since shorty after September 11, 2001.
I’ve been quietly voting Conservative while most of my old school friends are convinced they’re already living in a fascist state.
Canada of course is still a very pleasant place to live but people are hard wired to believe injury and death are lurking in the tall grass.
It used to be leopard. Today it’s marginally reducing the CBC’s budget.
Tedd:
Actually, if you look at the alternative ratings in the Economic Freedom of the World report, you’ll find this quote on page 26:
My point is that the decline has been very modest, it has started in 2000, and (if you look at the graph on the same page) it is not worldwide: the worldwide average has *increased* by a whopping 0.12 (on a scale of 1 to 10) since 2000. (Meanwhile, the US rating has decreased by 0.92.)
You are quite right to acknowledge the good work of the Chretien government. Keep in mind, however, that the past is no reliable guide to the future: Cameron is no Thatcher, and Corbyn is no Blair.
I had dinner with my very good friends and neighbours for 40 odd years recently. They are seniors like me, very well educated, and suffer from Harper Derangement Syndrome. They call Harper a control freak. Surely you want, as Prime Minister, someone capable of being in control of the country.
It’s “politician’s logic” from Yes, Minister: “We must do something, this is something, therefore, we must do this.”
Tranio, please permit me to disagree. In the US, the quintessential “control freak” presently occupies the White House, and look how well that is working out. Personally, the last thing I want in a President (or a Prime Minister) is someone who wants to, let alone thinks he is capable of actually being, “in control of the country.” I’d rather have one who naps through his entire term and allows the country to muddle through on its own. Personally, I wish Obama would spend significantly more time on the golf course, and on vacations with his execrable wife, and less time in the Oval Office creating mischief.
I have not heard or spoken to a single person who can articulate just what it is that Harper is being a control freak about. To me, this is an astro-turf media driven narrative that has, for some reason unknown to me, caught on (just like Obama being a genius of some sort), to what effect it will really have we shall soon see. But the thought of Mulcair and the NDP holding the reigns of power makes me cringe, for that is the party of control freaks if there ever was one. If or when that happens, you can bet that the MSM will gladly look the other way.
JDN pretty much has it in that first sentence. And the next.
Canada has a Prime Minister who is essentially boring and has never been as cooperative as the media would have liked. He is fully aware of their leftward biases and has consistently refused to pander to them. Nevertheless, mistakes have been made. (Not that this should ever have been unexpected.)
It is ironic that two of the senators (appointed by him) to have very recently come under investigation by the RCMP for misuse of of their senatorial spending allowances are former journalists.