With Hurricane Matthew set to strike the Florida coast this weekend, climate alarmism has predictably reared its ugly head once again. As with each and every catastrophic meteorological event for the past 25 years, the indigent savages of the Middle West are reminded by our cosmopolitan Manhattanite masters that bad weather is not the result of a dynamic earth but of an imperialistic reliance on evil fossil fuels. The biblical natural terrors wrought by Mother Gaia are invited by a selfish nation of greedy consumers, if only we would repent and subordinate the private to the collective good! Then we would have a bountiful harvest!
Indeed the Democrat party in the US and the broader globalist coalition in the UN have adopted a crusader's zeal in the advancement of their climate agenda. It has become uncouth and almost impolite to express even the smallest doubt in the illogic of the latest environmentalist dogma from the new cadre of climate hustlers; and this is the heart of the issue.
Whether or not human economic activity significantly impacts the global climate is irrelevant, this is a scientific question which very few specialists have the authority to deliver legitimate answers. The implicit political question of climate change must be answered through the lens of political theory. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are not campaigning to persuade the public that economic activity changes climate, this is a foregone conclusion. They are campaigning to persuade people that government is the solution to climate change.
Therefore, the scientific debate over the cause of atmospheric changes is the wrong argument to have in the political realm. Leonardo DiCaprio is an actor. Bill Nye is an engineer, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a physicist. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are political hacks. The strongest voices in the climate change camp have no legitimate claim to understand much less make sweeping claims about the nature of a field as complicated and technical as climate science. This becomes apparent when they appear on late night talk show hosts and before UN committees. Very rarely is the science of climate discussed, the dominant theme is always which policies can governments impose on their subjects if only they would surrender the sole responsibility of changing the earth's temperature.
This is the argument which the the media will not allow to pass. The state has invented the false dichotomy between the knuckle dragging simpletons who still call it global warming and the blessed sun children on the right side of history, who believe in the pagan god of climate change and necessarily sacrifice their liberties at the altar of state to combat it. There is no third way in this Orwellian narrative. The opinion of all sensible Americans is to keep an open mind in the scientific debate, listening only to climate scientists and identifying which agencies receive their money from the United Nations; then, making an informed decision on how to proceed in a manner consistent with the institutions and traditions of a free society.
Whether the climate is changing or not because I drive to school every day is beyond me; and frankly it is beyond 99% of the loudmouth liberal talking heads on TV as well. What I do know is that even if man was proven to cause climate change beyond a shadow of a doubt, the environmentalist bureaucratic regime in Washington DC would still be operating beyond its constitutional jurisdiction. The United Nations would still have no moral or legal claim to infringe on national sovereignty because IPCC models said that private economic activity was changing the temperature.
A world in which global government presides over the daily economic decisions of sovereign Americans is a world which is not worth saving. I would rather live in Waterworld so long as my natural rights were enshrined and protected by the Constitution than to toil under the contemptuous mandate of globalist technocrats. The climate change agenda has never been about the environment, the climate agenda is about control. Put this piece of garbage in this colored bin and the temperature doesn't increase. Don't use this kind of light bulb or else the ice caps will melt. American auto manufacturers must comply with unconstitutional environmental regulations or else Florida will be underwater!
What happened to the left wing's skepticism of power? When George W. Bush toppled Saddam Hussein, the left cried tyranny! Buzzwords permeated the culture. The military industrial complex is taking over, they said. Perpetual war on terror was a smokescreen for big government, they said. And what about the environmental cartel? Is there a war more perpetual and omnipresent than the state's war against the climate of the planet? It is high time that Americans in both camps wake up to a common foe in a globalist government which uses terror to demand sacrifice.
At what point does this war on climate end? The one talking point which both parties can ignorantly regurgitate about the Iraq War is that George Bush didn't have an exit plan. Tell me then, what is the exit plan on the war on climate? Or the war on poverty? Or the war on racism? Or the war on sexism? As cliche as this proposition is, we must open or eyes to the forces at work behind these moralizing crusades. Polarization has estranged us from our most important affiliation which is neither Republican or Democrat but sovereign American. So quickly do angry conservatives and liberals jump at the chance to shout down the opposing argument which both sides have heard before, without realizing that it's all just a circus.
While Sean Hannity and Alan Combs were screaming and shouting about a science which they know nothing about, the budget and jurisdiction of the EPA expanded tenfold beyond its congressional mandate; United Nations technocrats authored thousands of pages of statist schemes to restrict private economic activity in Western nations; and American manufacturing lost millions of jobs to third world countries because of environmental regulations, to the convenient profit of multinational corporations. Just what is the immediate threat to the wellbeing of the this planet? A climate disaster which supposedly lurks just around the corner as it has for half a century or the slow march of that omnipotent beast, supernational government, its tentacles invading every decision-making institution on the globe?
We must have the courage as Patrick Henry did so many years ago. To look in the face of an uncertain future which may hold global meltdown and address it through voluntary action as a free people. To shirk the impulse of expediency which tempts us all to delegate a hard choice to a power hungry pencil pusher in a far away capital. To drown out the cacophony of smug patronizing phonies on CSPAN and CNN with that uniquely American, righteous declaration of a free people, "Give me liberty, or give me death!"