Thanks to Andy Revkin, here’s the link to Walter Russell Mead‘s blog post “The Big Green Lie Exposed“, that I believe vindicates all The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE has been writing about since December 2007.
The text is incredibly jam-packed with quotable remarks, such as:
the reason that the Great Global Green Dream is melting lies in the sad truth that whatever the scientific facts of the matter, the global green movement is so blind and inept when it comes to policy and process that it has deeply damaged the causes it cares most about
(about Climategate) The greens were found innocent of inventing the science, but guilty of systematically hyping their case
excitable greens have oversold a wide variety of worst case scenarios — and underestimated the complex nature of the relationship between climate change and world politics
The Big Lie is that the green movement is a source of coherent or responsible counsel about what to do
Many leaders of today’s environmental movement are like the anti-alcohol activists before Prohibition
The green movement’s strategic failure is also reminiscent of the Peace Movement of the 1920s
You can diagnose a disease but have no clue how to treat it. You can be an excellent climate scientist and a wretched social engineer. You can want to do good and end up furthering exactly the evils you most deplore
The real and lasting damage that the green movement sustained in the last eight months has been the revelation that it is strategically and politically incompetent
Precisely because a growing body of science points to the existence of some serious concerns about climate, we must think carefully and clearly
Alcohol abuse was a real problem in 1918, but the Prohibitionist belief that there was One Big Legislative Answer only made things worse
At best, the green movement might be compared to an alarm clock: jangling shrilly to wake up the world. That is fair enough; they have turned our attention to a problem that needs to be carefully examined and dealt with. But the first thing you do when you wake up is to turn the alarm clock off; otherwise that shrill beeping noise will distract you from the problems of the day
And so on and so forth. Whatever one thinks of AGW, “The Big Green Lie Exposed” has to be mandatory reading!
(about Tom Friedman’s “Going Cheney on Climate“, IHT print edition, Dec 10, 2009)
From: Maurizio Morabito
To: Letters IHT
In a slightly unsettling if not miraculous development on his way to fight climate change, Tom Friedman tells us today that Dick Cheney’s “instinct” (treating any “low-probability, high-impact event” as a certainty) “is precisely the right framework with which to think about the climate issue“.
As Mr Friedman rightly points out, Cheney’s strategy concerns “the same ‘precautionary principle’ that also animated environmentalists“. Unfortunately, previous performances bodes badly for the attitude that has brought upon us the Iraq invasion disaster.
It is a fact that everybody wants a green economy with clean air and non-polluting energy for all. Greenhood has become the new “motherhood and apple pie” of politics. It is also a fact that a shared goal doesn’t mean a shared idea on how to reach it. Each one of the various ways to address the risk of catastrophical global warming has its own inherent costs and risks. It is not just about declaring the will to buy insurance “aggressively“: one has to go out and choose which insurance to buy, weighing the various pros and cons.
For example, steel giant Mittal has been recently reported as benefiting around £1,000,000,000 ($1.6 billions) from the European emission trading scheme (cap-and-trade) If Mr Friedman wants to be serious about preparing for climate change, that’s what he should be discussing about.
A Call for Entries for a European Green Capital award? No big deal, obviously.
But…a 2009 call for entries for a European Green Capital award for 2012 and 2013? We’re definitely into “Obama Peace or Rather Hope Prize” territory there.
That’s all confirmed by the award “concept“:
Starting in 2010, one European city will be selected as the European Green Capital of the year. The award will be given to a city that:
- Has a consistent record of achieving high environmental standards;
- Is committed to ongoing and ambitious goals for further environmental improvement and sustainable development;
- Can act as a role model to inspire other cities and promote best practices to all other European cities.The award marks a city’s wish and capability to solve environmental problems in order toboth improve the quality of life of its citizens and reduce the burden it imposes on the global environment as a whole.
Read carefully: “wish and capability to solve environmental problem“. The actual solving of environmental problems is no more than an afterthought: and so it makes perfect sense to designate winners years in advance, as if we already knew now which city will make the most effort to be environmentally friendly 3 or 4 years in the future…
And it’s not even my idea…
From the BBC’s Climate Change – The Blog of Bloom
“Hitler: the green movement’s German shepherd?”
by Shanta Barley
Ever wondered why it is that Germany […] is so far ahead of the rest of the world in the race to be green?
According to Lord Anthony Giddens’ latest book, ‘The Politics of Climate Change‘ and a number of respected historians, Hitler may have given Germany a head-start. Not only did he pass the most stringent and comprehensive environmental protection law in the world at that time, but he also had a soft spot for vegetarianism, organic nibbles and animal welfare (up until the point when he poisoned his doting German Shepherd, Blondi, that is).
‘The Nazi “ecologists” […] had the aim of preventing damage to the environment in undeveloped areas, protecting forests and animals and reducing air pollution.’
Incredibly, it gets even juicier than one could have ever dreamed
[…] the Nazis, […] says Peter Staudenmaier, co-author of the book ‘Ecofascism’ were ‘conscious promoters and executors of a vile program explicitly dedicated to inhuman racist violence, massive political repression and worldwide military domination. Their “ecological” involvements, far from offsetting these fundamental commitments, deepened and radicalized them‘. […]
The Washington Post wakes up to the vacuity of so many anti-climate-change initiatives: “On Climate, Symbols Can Overshadow Substance – Lights-Out Event More Showy Than Practical” – by Shankar Vedantam
[…] the modern environmental movement […] has become a crusade that is partly moral statement and partly fashion statement. Earth Hour, Earth Day and the Miss Earth beauty pageant — “saving the planet, one pageant at a time” — generate lots of publicity, but they also tend to prompt people and companies to choose what looks good over what works.
[…] “Solar panels are popular because you can see you are doing something — and your neighbors can see it, too.”
[…] The behavior of individuals, companies and nations is largely determined by structural factors, not personal choices.
[…] When it comes to turning off lights, for example, Earth Hour would have produced far more energy savings — although no cool photos of darkened cities — if it had asked people to save energy during the late afternoon, rather than at 8 p.m.