The View From 1776

§ American Traditions

§ People and Ideas

§ Decline of Western Civilization: a Snapshot

§ Books to Read

§ BUY MY BOOK

Liberal_Jihad_Cover.jpg
    Best blogs on Religion

Friday, December 31, 2004

UN “Moral Authority”

Only the UN can do the job of handling international humanitarian aid?

——————————-
The UK News.scotsman.com website has a news story dated December 30, 2004, which begins as follows:

  *************
United States President George Bush was tonight accused of trying to undermine the United Nations by setting up a rival coalition to coordinate relief following the Asian tsunami disaster.

The president has announced that the US, Japan, India and Australia would coordinate the world?s response.

But former International Development Secretary Clare Short said that role should be left to the UN.

?I think this initiative from America to set up four countries claiming to coordinate sounds like yet another attempt to undermine the UN when it is the best system we have got and the one that needs building up,? she said.

?Only really the UN can do that job,? she told BBC Radio Four?s PM programme.

?It is the only body that has the moral authority…..”

  **********

This amounts to a new definition of chutzpah.  It’s fair to say that the UN has all the moral authority of a whore master who is also a drug dealer.

In a Wall Street Journal article dated December 29, 2004, under the title Sex for Food , it’s reported that:

“Two years after the charges first surfaced, Kofi Annan has finally admitted that U.N. peacekeeping troops sexually abused war refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo. “I am really shocked by these accusations,” the United Nations Secretary-General told reporters last week.

He shouldn’t be. Allegations of sex crimes committed by U.N. staff and troops date back at least a decade and span operations on three continents, in places like Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cambodia. But rather than showing the kind of “zero tolerance” toward sexual crimes that Mr. Annan now promises, the U.N. has treated such instances with cavalier nonchalance.

In Congo, some 150 cases are under investigation. The charges range from rape, in which some victims were children, to sexual exploitation. In some cases, women and young girls have been coaxed into sex in exchange for essential food items. A French U.N. staffer was arrested for raping underage girls and taking digital pictures of them. He has been sent back home where he will stand trial.”

Apart from that, we might also remember the UN’s running the largest financial crime in world history with its humanitarian-aid-for-oil program that put an estimated $17+ billion into Saddam Hussein’s pockets, and tens of millions into the pockets of UN and French government officials, while enriching the French overseer Banque Paribas with fees for illegal and unethical diversions of funds.

P.S. The world’s previously largest financial crime was perpetrated by French bank Credit Lyonnais.

Thursday, December 30, 2004

Education and Outsourcing: a Bleak Future

Liberals of Bill Clinton’s generation destroyed American education; now they expect poorly educated young workers to pay for their Social Security benefits.

————
The following item from Letters to the Editors in the December 30, 2004, edition of the Wall Street Journal emphasizes the points made in Liberal-socialist Micromanagement vs Science , in Education vs Outsourcing, and in Followup - Education vs Outsourcing.

  *****************
U.S. Technology Dominance? Think Again
http://online.wsj.com/opinion/letters?mod=2_0048

Andy Kessler’s Dec. 23 editorial-page commentary ” We Think, They Sweat ” is a prime example of the hubris that will cause great loss to the U.S. economy and loss of employment. He seems to believe that only in the U.S. can inventions be made and new products designed. He overlooks Toyota, Sony, Samsung, Tata and many other emerging technology, pharmaceutical/medical, and other companies in China, India, South Korea, Japan etc. When he says “they” only sweat while we “think,” he is looking at history. He fails to explain why, when “they” graduate five times more Ph.D.s in engineering and science every year than “we” do, we should expect to continue to dominate thinking and high-paying jobs.

As an entrepreneur in Silicon Valley with years of experience building companies and leading-edge products I can tell you our loss of position is already great and growing rapidly. When you start a company today, in order to secure funding you are expected to do your research and development overseas (frequently India or China, depending on what you are doing). If you propose to do the “thinking” for product design, development or manufacturing in the U.S., only rarely will you find investment capital.

Mr. Kessler (and the rest of us) must realize we are moving away from technology industries and related employment to an economic model based on services that need a person’s physical presence. We are fast losing our ability to compete where the work can move elsewhere. The “thinking” barriers of university education, experienced labor force, critical technology research centers, etc. that kept high-prestige, high-pay jobs here in the U.S. have fallen. Until we start “thinking” about shaping our future opportunities, given the new facts of life, we are the ones who will be “sweating.”

Richard Parenteau
Managing Partner
QuickCycle Consulting, LLC
Sunnyvale, Calif.


Student activists of the late 1960s and early 1970s have had a hugely destructive impact on American society, particularly in education.  Standards of classroom behavior and academic performance have been degraded.  Students were shunted away from the hard mathematical and scientific subjects and pushed toward social work and politics.  They were instructed that communal living in the socialized political state was the only appropriate goal, and they were sent out from the classrooms eager to “change the world,” without any knowledge of the existing and historical world they were to change.

Multi-cultural education and politically-correct instruction have been remarkably successful in meeting those objectives.  But at the price of several dumbed-down generations of students who are now ill-prepared to meet the onslaught of foreign scientific, economic, and military competition.

The full impact of this travesty will be felt increasingly as Bill Clinton’s student-activist generation retires, expecting to be provided full Social Security and Medicare benefits financed by the labor of only two full-time workers per retiree.  And these workers will be less productive and less able to compete with their foreign counterparts than any Americans of the past, because of liberal-socialist corruption of public education.

Posted by Thomas E. Brewton on 12/30 at 11:20 PM
Education • (0) Comments
Print this ArticleEmail A FriendPermalink

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

What is The View From 1776?

Donald J. Devine’s book seems to describe it correctly.

———————-
An op-ed page book review in today’s Washington Times, Back to basics, spotlights the wrong turn, the left fork, taken by Americans in the 20th century.

William H. Peterson reviews IN DEFENSE OF THE WEST: AMERICAN VALUES UNDER SIEGE By Donald J. Devine,?University Press of America.  I haven’t read the book, but it seems to be right down the middle of the straight and narrow path to political and social rectitude.

The highlights in Mr. Peterson’s review, though he doesn’t use the term, allude to our unwritten constitution, without which the written Constitution becomes the defenseless victim of liberal-socialist lawyers and politicians.  In that regard, read the Statement of Purpose for this website, at the top of the left-hand column.

The UN to the Rescue

The Four Horsemen of the Socialist Apocalypse are Ready to Saddle Up.

————————-
Bill Sammon writes in today’s Washington Times (U.N. official slams U.S. as ‘stingy’ over aid) that Kofi Annan’s highly efficient and thoroughly moral bureaucracy bear no grudges.  They aren’t willing to help the Iraquis rebuild, but they are willing to instruct us in the proper, socialistic manner of conducting foreign affairs.

Reporter Sammon writes: “The Bush administration yesterday pledged $15 million to Asian nations hit by a tsunami that has killed more than 22,500 people…..?But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being “stingy” with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.”

How could we not have realized this ourselves?  If we were a thoroughly amoral, socialistic nation of the sort envisioned by that great moral exemplar, the Hero of Chappaquiddick, Senator Ted Kennedy, and his acolyte Senator John Kerry, we would be raising taxes and throwing people out of work here in order to redistribute our wealth to the “workers of the world.”

We don’t even need to set up a special program to aid the tsunami victims.  The UN already has its “well-oiled” humanitarian aid staff available, fresh from their efficient cooperation with Saddam Hussein to aid his sick and hungry subjects.

Monday, December 27, 2004

A Leap of Faith

Atheists and agnostics are betting on a losing hand.

————
S. T. Karnick’s article A Victory for Theism, published 12/21/2004 on The American Spectator website, deals with the great flap arising from stories that prominent atheist Antony Flew had become a believer.

Atheists of the world indignantly denied the reports, and Flew himself said, with regard to theism, “They certainly have not persuaded me.”

Writer Karnick then notes, “However, Flew has indeed conceded what must be seen as the criticial point. It is this: that atheism has, at its base, a leap of faith exactly identical to that which theists make. Theists look at all the evidence we encounter in the natural world and conclude that it is consonant with belief in an intelligent, all-powerful being behind it, whom we call God. Atheists look at the same evidence and conclude that this cosmos must have all just happened somehow. The critical point is that neither position is provable .”

This is one of the principal points made in Proof of God’s Existence.

There are a great many things believed by vast numbers of people, things that cannot be absolutely proved.  David Hume’s famous skepticism left Western philosophers with the uncomfortable awareness that familiar, everyday events occur in the same way so often and so regularly that we predict their occurrence with certainty.  Yet there is nothing provable about our predictions beyond the probability that the expected events will occur. 

If we disallow the certitude of religious Jews’ and Christians’ faith (and I do not), and if we look only at probabilities, atheists and agnostics are betting heavily on very long odds.  The secular materialism that is the philosophical accompaniment of their beliefs has almost never worked as predicted.

In contrast, Christian and religious Jewish faith in the living and eternal God has produced the greatest improvements in human living standards in world history.  Those improvements are more importantly spiritual than material, but the material side of religious individualism whips the secular materialism of socialism every time.

Sunday, December 26, 2004

What’s the matter with kids today?

Having more working and divorced mothers has taken a toll on American society.

———————
Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Jane Eisner’s recent article, American Rhythms | What’s the matter with kids today? , deals with the problems that have come to characterize too many Americans since the “liberation” of women by the 1960s and 1970s Baby Boomer student activism and President Johnson’s socialist Great Society.  Ms. Eisner’s starting point is her commentary on Mary Eberstadt’s “Home Alone America: The Hidden Toll of Day Care, Behavioral Drugs, and other Parent Substitutes.”

The article describes the corrosive effects on family life covered in Why Did Mothers Begin Leaving Kids in Day-Care?.

Muddled-head Evolutionary “Thinking”

Cell phones as a secret tool to create socialist heaven-on-earth.

———————
My friend Heidi Hoff Wurst emailed the following article (the source is unknown to me).

“Cell Phone Radiation May Speed Human Evolution

“A new study by European Union (EU) researchers shows that the electromagnetic radiation from cellular phones can cause DNA mutations that reproduce, “opening the door to new vistas in human evolution,” according to a spokesman for the cell phone industry.

“A lot of the news you’ll hear in the coming days will dwell on the potential for health damage, tumors and the like,” said the unnamed industry source. “But if Darwin was right, mutations are good for our species. The faster our cells mutate the faster we’ll evolve and fulfill the dreams of generations of evolutionary biologists.”

“The spokesman acknowledged that during the initial waves of mutation the natural selection process “could get messy,” but he insisted that “most mutations would be beneficial—potentially yielding larger brains, additional ears (‘Can you hear me now?’) or even an extra appendage for holding a cell phone while driving.”

” “Thanks to cell phones, you can accomplish everything more quickly,” said the source. “We’ve taken Darwinian evolution from the realm of wishful thinking for atheists, to something that may produce results in a generation or less. We’ve just turbo-charged the time factor and reduced the element of chance making evolution faster and more reliable.”

“One cell phone company is reportedly already focus-group testing ads with the slogan “We’re the missing link.” “

——————-
One line from the article says it all:  “But if Darwin was right, mutations are good for our species. The faster our cells mutate the faster we’ll evolve and fulfill the dreams of generations of evolutionary biologists.”

This ludicrous statement typifies the muddle-headed contradictions that pass for science in today’s educational system.  Teachers unions and national-state planners are so intently focused upon teaching Darwinian evolutionary dogma as a cornerstone of socialist collectivism and moral relativity that they don’t even notice that they are talking out of both sides of their mouths (or, if you prefer, speaking with forked tongues).

First, the most basic purpose of Darwin’s hypothesis was to deny the existence of God by attempting to prove that every life form is the result of random chance, that there is no intelligent design to any of the life forms on earth.  If that can be “scientifically” established, said Darwin and his supporters like Thomas Huxley, then there is no such thing as morality, no such thing as sin.  Instead, there is nothing more than the struggle for survival.

Darwinian “scientists” are at pains to tell us that, contrary to Biblical doctrine and moral philosophy, there was no purpose to life.  It just happened.  There is, therefore, clearly no such thing as higher or lower forms of life, nor is there any “evolutionary dream” to be fulfilled.  Things are no more than what they happen, at the moment, to be. 

There is nothing to say that evolution will not wipe out all the presumably “accumulated” physical and mental characteristics of humans.  Random genetic mutations theoretically could produce almost anything.  All that Darwin said is that whatever random genetic material at a given time equips its possessors to survive in greater numbers will cause that genetic material to tend toward dominance. 

It’s just as easy to envision a brutish, immensely strong, leathery-skinned creature of limited intelligence wiping out humans as to imagine that humans will evolve to some higher and better form (remember that there is no good or bad, better or worse, in Darwin’s scheme; just physical survivability).

How then to square that with the putatively scientific statement: “But if Darwin was right, mutations are good for our species. The faster our cells mutate the faster we’ll evolve and fulfill the dreams of generations of evolutionary biologists”?

Packing this sort of nonsense into the heads of inexperienced students, one may suppose, is what liberals mean when they protest that they want children to learn to think, not to absorb specific information about academic subjects.

The most important thing to notice, however, is the real point of such double-talk: its unstated subtext that intellectual state-planners can structure society in ways that will shape humans into the types ideally suited for the earthly “perfection” of communal, socialistic living.  That is the real dream of evolutionary biologists.

Cell phones might just turn out to be one of their secret weapons in creating the Brave New World.

Posted by Thomas E. Brewton on 12/26 at 06:11 PM
Junk Science • (1) Comments
Print this ArticleEmail A FriendPermalink

Tuesday, December 21, 2004

A Christmas Message from the ACLU

What is the ACLU telling us?

————-
More than ever before, the media have been full of incidents in which anything remotely related to Christmas has been banned.  Schools no longer permit Christmas trees or other decorations, exchanging Christmas cards, or singing Christmas carols.  Macy’s, the famous setting of the 1930s Christmas-related movie “Miracle on 34th Street,” no longer permits any display of merchandise or store decorations related to Christmas.  Even Congress has got into the spirit of the “season” by displaying a “holiday” tree.

The impetus for this is the ACLU’s unremitting jihad against Christianity.  Nominally they are simply attempting to enforce the First Amendment’s prohibition against Congress’s taking any action to establish an official state religion.  In addition, the ostensible aim is to prevent anything that might offend the sensibilities of any individual who is not a Christian; deeply offending Christians, however, is good, clean fun. 

All of this is well reported territory.  So let’s look at what is really being said to us by the ACLU:  “You shall have no morality except the arbitrary rules of social justice established by the secular religion of the socialist state.”

This being understood as the true message of the ACLU, what is the true message that ought to be conveyed by celebration of Christmas?

First, it’s obviously not that Christmas is to be the year’s biggest shopping season.  No one should begrudge merchants this opportunity, but it has little to do with the message of Christmas.

Second, it’s more than just good cheer, though Christians are commanded to be thankful to God for all of life’s blessings.  We are to recognize that it’s not about us, but about what we can do for others.  The great Biblical commandments, for Jews and Christians alike, are, first, to love God with all our hearts, minds, spirit, and strength, and, second, to love our neighbors as ourselves.  In other words, personal morality is at the center of the message of Christmas.

To paraphrase President Kennedy’s inaugural speech, “Ask not what the secular, socialist state owes you; ask not what conduct is prescribed by its intellectual social justice; but look into your own heart and ask what should you, as an individual, do to bring joy and comfort to others who may be hurting, who may be comforted by a bit of human kindness.”

This is the most central of all bedrock principles that form the foundation of Western civilization.  Yet it is the very one that the ACLU, and all other socialist organizations, seek to undermine.

For more detailed background, see
The Pledge Under God, Under Attack: Liberty vs License - Part Three, which explains that the ACLU’s interpretation of the First Amendment is historically inaccurate, that merely mentioning a specific religion and even advocating religious morality are not even close to the meaning of “established” religion, as Europeans and the American colonists had experienced it in the centuries before 1787.  That posting makes four other points: first, that the atheism espoused by the ACLU is part of the religion of socialism; second, that atheistic socialism is amoral, which means that political rulers are bound by no inherent limits on their powers; third, that wherever atheistic socialism has gained political ascendency despotic rule has followed; fourth; that, while it is inaccurate to say that the United States is entirely a Christian nation, it is historically accurate to say that all of its political institutions were founded upon Christian ideas of morality.

Multi-cultural Education Revisited

When the State of New York officially adopted multi-cultural education in 1991 it was a bad idea.  It still is.

—————————
Lawrence Auster’s website, The View From the Right, has a re-run of his 1989 article The Curriculum of Inclusion opposing the prospective adoption of multi-cultural education by the New York State Board of Regents.

The article below is my op-ed piece to the same end that was published July 7, 1991, in the Gannett Westchester Newspapers, just before the state’s official adoption of this disastrous educational concept. 

New York’s Commissioner of Education was Thomas Sobol, who had been superintendent of education in Scarsdale, New York, where I lived at that time.  It was Commissioner Sobol who pushed multi-cultural education into being.

Coincidentally, last year it was parents in Scarsdale who gained national attention by refusing to permit their children to be tested under the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind school competence program.  Scarsdale parents said that they didn’t want their children to be able to pass tests; they wanted them to learn how to think. 

No one has yet demonstrated, of course, that there is a divergence between the two.

***********

Gannett Westchester Newspapers Op-ed Page July 7, 1991

Every concerned citizen should oppose adoption of the recommendations of the One Nation, Many Peoples: A Declaration of Cultural Interdependence report recently delivered to the State Commissioner of Education.  We do not need and can not afford this expensive and misguided new program that aims to spotlight the cultural values of other societies and to question those of the United States.  Its basic thrust is to emphasize the ethnic differences of our citizens, rather than the common values that historically have united us.

The report does not address the need for better quality education, a goal that has little connection with ethnic consciousness?raising instruction.  Students presently are insufficiently grounded in the essence of our Constitution and Declaration of Independence ? respect for the rights and responsibilities of individuals, within a framework of English common law affirming the sanctity of contracts that protect everything from property rights to civil rights.  Nor are they given any sense of the two thousand six hundred year history of western humanity’s struggle to conceptualize and to gain the rights we today take for granted.

In reality, the report is a political program that will be useful to special interest groups as recruitment propaganda.  And it is an economic program that will benefit publishing companies by mandating new text books, videos, and revised maps, and teachers unions by adding to administrative and teaching staffs.

? No society can survive if its citizens do not understand and support its fundamental cultural values.  Teaching that the political philosophy underlying the Constitution is but one of many competing and equally valid sets of cultural values is, at the least, mischievous.  One has to look no further than the breakdown of traditional German cultural values in the nihilistic chaos of the Weimar Republic during the 1920’s and 30’s and the Nazi “solution” to fear for our future.  Contemporary strife in the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia demonstrate the destructive impact of cultural diversity.  When the 1950’s winds of change swept western colonial powers out of Africa and India, stable political order was replaced with savage tribal and religious butchery that killed hundreds of thousands.  Societies and their values are far more fragile than the distinguished special educational panel appear to recognize.

? Multicultural relativism has absolutely no sustainable claim to equal treatment with this nation’s western European cultural traditions.  Blacks who are descendents of slaves did not come to this country by choice.  But every other group, including West Indian blacks, have come here of their own free will, precisely to enjoy the benefits of our culture.  Only in a western democracy like the United States could the idea of cultural relativism even be discussed seriously without endangering the advocates’ lives.  Other cultures believe that their values have an exclusive claim to truth, and their rulers back that claim with brutal force.  Eastern Europe’s experiences under Soviet domination and recent suppression of students in China are examples.  Blacks within Nelson Mandela’s territory suspected of favoring the Inkatha’s political and social views have been burned to death with rubber necklaces or hacked to bits with machetes.

? Using public schools to teach the multicultural heritage of minority citizens will not achieve the implicit goal of minority self?respect.  Real self?respect is earned by individuals through personal effort and accomplishment.  Were it otherwise, the New York Jets would again be Super Bowl champions, using playbooks sprinkled with reminders of Joe Namath’s long?ago exploits.  Emphasizing ethnic conflicts without a thorough understanding of historical and cultural specifics of each society will simply embitter black and hispanic students.  Rather than giving them an educational framework for self-development to reap society’s economic fruits, the public schools will have taught them that the system has unfairly deprived them of their share of entitlements.

? The proposed program will not even be effective in teaching students about other cultures.  A few glancing references to aspects of other cultures that have influenced our traditions will produce about the same real level of comprehension as a grade school survey course on nuclear particle physics.  The culture of any one people, let alone all those affecting the United States, is a major specialty at the university level.  Taking bits and pieces of cultural references out of context, as a critique of our society, will be confusing and as little enlightening as 10?second political commercials.  In the 1960’s, under the sway of well?intentioned but disastrous “maximum feasible political participation” community action programs, Black Panthers combined elements of socialist philosophy with artifacts of West African culture.  One result was Huey Newton’s notorious paraphrase of Lenin that social justice emanates from a gun barrel.  Spike Lee’s movie, Do the Right Thing, reflects the dilemma of today’s students who will be taught that there may be no “right” or “wrong,” because different cultures give different answers to the same situation.  With the official sanction of the public school system, students will draw the appropriate conclusion that the only “wrong” is getting caught breaking the law.

? The proposed additions to the curriculum and manifold changes in existing courses will be very costly.  Our political system gives minorities the right to maintain their cultural traditions through private social and religious organizations, but not at public expense.  It is irresponsible, when students perform poorly in basic English, literature, mathematics, and the physical sciences, to divert scarce funds to new textbooks, videos, and other paraphernalia for a purpose so little relevant to their welfare.  And we know from sad experience that once we embark on this tangent expenditures will balloon every year far into the future.

? The sensible and responsible course is to revert to consideration of the 1987 report of the State Regents’ committee headed by Adelaide L. Sanford, a distinguished black educator.  That report, issued shortly after State Education Commissioner, Thomas Sobol, assumed his office, focused on aspects of black and hispanic culture that ill-prepare minority students for school and ways to make teaching more effective.  When the report was publicly attacked as racist by black and hispanic “leaders,” Commissioner Sobol immediately disowned it.

Four years later, after continuing deterioration of educational standards, we are offered the One Nation, Many Peoples: A Declaration of Cultural Interdependence report, a pandering to the political clout of minority politicians who are ignorant or uncaring of the real interests of their constituents.  This report is true racism in a virulent form.  It offers no real help to minority students.  It mires them further in the victim mentality that diverts them from the only effective path to a better life ? individual dedication to the hard work necessary to master the tools and rules of the game of our western civilization.  Our so?called educational and minority leaders should hang their heads in abject shame.

Posted by Thomas E. Brewton on 12/21 at 03:08 AM
Education • (0) Comments
Print this ArticleEmail A FriendPermalink

Sunday, December 19, 2004

The Kyoto Protocol: an Economic Free Rider Problem

In two respects, the Kyoto Protocol is an economic free rider situation: in both respects, the United States is expected to pay the price, while other nations reap the benefits.

———————
The TechCentralStation website has a couple of excellent articles about the prospective demise of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty that proposes to reduce emissions of the so-called greenhouse gases, ostensibly to protect the earth from catastrophic overheating. 

The two articles are The Kyoto Protocol is Dead and Buenos Aires: Kyoto’s Waterloo.

The Kyoto Protocol and the related theory of greenhouse-gas global warming are propagandized by a UN research team.  Many of the “scientists” signing the UN’s report leading to the Kyoto Protocol are social scientists who have no credentials at all in climatology and related physical disciplines. 

Their activity is incorrectly called “scientific.”  It is, in fact, socialistic regulatory dogma masquerading as science.  The correct term for such nonsense is scientism.

The New York Times (who else?) repeatedly dissembles that all, or nearly all, of the world’s scientists back the greenhouse-gas theory of global warming.  Yet actual polls show that far fewer than half of qualified scientists subscribe to the theory, with the majority finding it either unproved or flatly wrong.

There is plenty of evidence that our earth’s climate is warming at the present time, but very little evidence to support the theory that this results from greenhouse gas emissions.  There is also abundant evidence to show that similar warming periods, as well as ice ages, have been recurring natural phenomena over the millennia.  The most likely candidate is nature’s periodic increases and decreases in solar flare activity that projects varying levels of energy towards the earth as the sun goes through the normal process of nuclear fusion.

Why then is the Kyoto Protocol such a big deal to liberal-socialists?

First, liberals instinctively view Big Business as enemies of the “the people.”  Hence anything that interferes with business has a head start in their estimation.  And Kyoto qualifies handsomely:  it’s intention is to shut down expansion of economic activity, especially in the United States.  Besides, regulation is what liberals do, and Kyoto is the biggest regulatory game around.

Second, global-warming theory is “scientific,” therefore putatively rational, which means that it’s right down the pipe to where liberals hearts are to be found.  No liberal-socialist can resist a “scientific” theory that opposes business activity.

Why is Kyoto an example of economic free-riding?

First, the practitioners of scientism can make their personal fortunes from peddling this theory.  They gain professional recognition that levers them into higher paying professorships; they become the beneficiaries of huge research grants; and they become highly paid stars of the lecture circuit.  What better way for an aspiring young graduate student to break into the big time?

This, of course, is free riding, because these practitioners of scientism contribute nothing to science.  They instead spread false panic, while raking in crooked profits.

Second, from the standpoint of international socialism, the intent was to give the less-developed nations a free ride at the expense of the United States; redistribute American wealth to the “workers of the world,” and all of that clap-trap of collective solidarity.  In order to attain the projected goals of reduced levels of greenhouse gas emissions, the United States would be compelled to stop economic expansion, even to reduce current levels of business activity.  Less-developed nations, needless to say, are supposed to expand their levels of economic activity to fill the gap.

Crimping the United States is also part of the foreign policy objectives of socialist France and Germany.  China, the world’s largest socialist nation, would be the greatest beneficiary.

Bottom line: the rest of the world envisioned an opportunity for a free ride by eating our lunch, while charging the bill to our account.

Posted by Thomas E. Brewton on 12/19 at 05:34 PM
Junk Science • (0) Comments
Print this ArticleEmail A FriendPermalink