There is one part in Homage to Catalonia when George Orwell observes that for a time he and his socialist comrades-in-arms in the Spanish civil war enjoyed true brotherhood. Socialism is an ideal where people share each other’s troubles and joys and each other’s worldly goods. You can understand its attraction. It’s just not compatible with human nature and economic progress.
Intelligence, ingenuity, talent, vigour, daring and drive are not equally distributed. And those who contribute more, want more. And the lure of having more brings out the best from those who can contribute more. Production, saving, capital accumulation, productivity all take an upward trajectory. Result prosperity.
It’s not socialism per se that leads to despotism. It is its incompatibility with human nature and progress. The powers that be eventually recognise that and must either give away their idealistic dreams and admit they were wrong or become despots and force people to accept economic misery. They generally choose the latter; at least until circumstances overwhelm them and their regimes – as happened in communist eastern Europe.
Socialism and Climate Cultism share the same underlying deficiency. Neither produce workable outcomes. They both look towards unachievable goals. One, utopia on earth. The other, net zero. And, unsurprisingly and inevitably, both lead to despotism. We are used to the despotism of socialism. Climate cultism had something of a fling in Nazi Germany but, essentially, it is new. The despotism which it generates is creeping up on us, largely unrecognised, because we have no historical experience to compare it with.
The load shedding requested of various industries and businesses when power runs short is the harbinger of more extensive and forceful things to come. A few other examples of unmistakable steps on the road to hell on earth are as follows:
- The Victorian government’s ban on gas connections in new homes. No cooking with gas for you!
- The same government’s just announced intention to fast-track wind and solar eruptions. In other words, its intention to steamroll those in rural and regional areas who might object.
- The Tailpipe emission standards announced by Bowen. You don’t like EVs? We’ll leave you no choice; make you buy them.
- AEMO’s so-called “virtual power plants” in its Integrated System Plan. How will that work? Voluntarily apparently. That’s risible. In the end result, it will work by enforcing the installation of smart meters in homes and businesses, which will allow home, business and EV batteries to be drained at will. Sorry, your EV battery has been flattened. Get an electric bus to work, if there’s any that are charged up.
- And, coming soon enough, requests to turn down air-conditioners (when it’s hot) and heaters (when it’s cold) will turn into orders, lest your power be cut off entirely.
Am I being paranoid? I don’t think so. What they (the climate cultists) are planning won’t work; can’t work. So what do you think they will do about it? Recant and admit the error of their ways? Start building new coal-fired power stations? Hardly.
Certainly looks like despotism. The changes being made in Victoria are on a par with the Soviet Union.
‘More pain’ for Vic farmers under ‘radical plan’ by govt to fast-track renewables (Sky News, 15 Mar)
Riding roughshod over the property rights of individuals. Inflicting health issues onto them. Restricting their ability to farm and hurting farm animals through infrasound. Making farmland unproductive under a sea of panels. Causing massive environmental damage through clear felling of forests, as recently occurred in Germany and Scotland. Killing birds and bats in their millions.
The Soviet Union did that sort of thing in pursuit of an imaginary utopia. These people are likewise pursuing the imaginary – not only unworkable renewables but the whole climate caper, since nothing much unusual is happening in the real world data. It’s all lurid warnings that never come true.
You can have: a) an economy; or b) Net Zero.
You can’t have both.
You can bet that the people in charge of this net-zero regime will continue to enjoy all the benefits that hydrocarbon energy provides. And also, their ‘enforcers’.
Serious question:
Why do such a large number of people either (a). believe the [insert most recent phrase for global warming] hype, or (b). View it as no immediate threat. i.e. Tolerate it?
By ‘people,’ I mean those who have no direct link, and thus nothing to gain (financially or otherwise). Peter’s first few paragraphs hinted at this. (I don’t have the detailed answer myself, only a very vague idea I’m unable to extrapolate).
Once we understand what the appeal is to those in either Category (a) or (b), we can begin to devise tactics to counter that appeal.
As I’ve written previously, facts and figures (objective measurements) are important, but used as the ‘point of the spear’ they will be wasted, because we realists have let ourselves be painted (or sculpted in titanium) as untrustworthy. In the 2 dimensional cartoon-like world where this narrative is being presented, we are the ‘Dick Dastardlys’ – the antagonists preventing the heroes from saving [insert anything here].
I believe that part of our counter-tactics must involve (once we’ve dealt with the perceived credibility issue mentioned in the above paragraph) less abstract numbers and concepts: How does this affect (now, and in the future if this trajectory continues) the average Shazza and Dazza in the street?
What we present needs to be more relatable to the individual: I’m presently working in a context where I see a range of people, many of whom comment in some way that life is not becoming simpler and easier to manage. When there are so many distractions to deal with, how can we expect the average person to take time out of their busy day to listen – actively listen and absorb information – to something they perceive does not affect them, here and now?
What they (the climate cultists) are planning won’t work; can’t work.
They know it won’t work, that’s the point, as Neil Oliver observed ” it’s not about going green, it’s about going without..”
I wonder if this sharing alike extends to the elites wives, sisters, girlfriends or daughters?
Or, if you’re a politician, you can get re-elected by promising new gas plants to keep the lights and heating on, or can have net zero.
But you can’t have both.
Just ask Rishi Sunak.
Ultimately, the “common thread” between socialism and the sco-nazis, is they BOTH have an “immaculate” solution in search of a “problem”.
And, as we can see, if there is NO real problem, the psychotics will create one.
We really are the arse end of the world where we are still going along with this shit when most other countries have moved on. Our only hope is that US and Europe will abandon the renewables nonsense so that we will be shamed into doing it too.
So what do you think they will do about it?
They will rush it through as quickly as possible, forcing dissenters to take their objections to the Supreme Court, because they know that once the Libs are in government again,much of this BS will be ditched.
?
Econtalk has a good episode with Christopher Hitchens (not everyone’s cup of tea) on his Orwell biography. Orwell might well be the most influential modern writer with Animal Farm and1984.
https://www.econtalk.org/hitchens-on-orwell/