Will Says; But Will The Warmers Take Note — Or Just Make Noise

Timon of Phlius, ancient Greek Skeptic philoso...

Image via Wikipedia

By Chuck Ring (GadaboutBlogalot ©2009 – 2010)

Quote Freely From The Article – Leave The Pseudonym Alone

George Will, serving as an op-ed writer on the Washington Post’s web presence has written a piece wherein he quotes a noted professor of politics at Bard College and Yale.  Of course, he also offers ample servings of his opinion.  I like Will and most of his commentary, but perhaps I’m to  apt to follow someone who does not follow all the  “warmers”  dogma.  If I still have “warmer” friends they might cringe when they see this post.  Maybe they’ll just saunter on … or not.  To get back to Will and his article, let’s look at this:

The collapsing crusade for legislation to combat climate change raises a question: Has ever a political movement made so little of so many advantages? Its implosion has continued since “the Cluster of Copenhagen, when world leaders assembled for the single most unproductive and chaotic global gathering ever held.” So says Walter Russell Mead, who has an explanation: Bambi became Godzilla.

I believe the climate change issue has been slapped on the head until some of its followers are dizzy, or perhaps dopey.  Not because, there is not climate change, but because “warmers”  have attempted to lay the cause for climate change and global warming in the main on humans.  To top their anthropological blame, I and others believe they failed miserably when they attempted  to explain away the East Anglia information obtained from hacked emails. Of course, there have been investigations which purport to absolve some of the actors in the controversy.  One blog reporting on the matter of some investigations will be found here. On to Will’s piece and his report on the mentioned professor’s assertions:

… Mead, a professor of politics at Bard College and Yale, notes that “the greenest president in American history had the largest congressional majority of any president since Lyndon Johnson,” but the environmentalists’ legislation foundered because they got “on the wrong side of doubt.”

And, further:

Environmentalists, Mead argues, have forgotten their origins, which were in skeptical “reaction against Big Science, Big Government and Experts.” Environmentalists once were intellectual cousins of economic libertarians who heed the arguments of Friedrich Hayek and other students of spontaneous order — in society or nature. Such libertarians caution against trying to impose big, simple plans on complex systems. They warn that governmental interventions in such systems inevitably have large unintended, because [sic] unforeseeable, consequences.

What Mr. Mead seems to say is the modern-day environmentalists (evios) have not only missed the boat, but were not even on the dock of public opinion and they allied themselves with big government factions.  I can remember when government programs were held at arm’s length, and insulted by the Mr. Cleans and Ms. Greens of the evios factions, some going so far as to break into nuclear facilities.  Now it seems the evios have the attention of every government in the world and the only groups protesting big government, aside from conservatives, are the anarchists.  No alliance existing or wanted between the two, I’d have to say.

Continue reading