Tuesday, June 03, 2008

Blue Planet In Green Shackles

The title comes from Czech President Vaclav Klaus's book about how the "green" movement and global warming alarmism is threatening the freedom of everyone. Apparently, the English translation of the book is currently out of stock, but nonetheless, let's talk about it anyway.

I'm not longer a "global warming skeptic" but now claim the title of "climate realist" because there is no question in my mind that the planet's climate is fine and will continue to be fine regardless of what mankind does. The only thing at risk is the freedom of people to live in the ways they prefer. If I can afford to pay $5 or $6 per gallon of gas to drive my kids and their friends around in my SUV, then I certainly should be free to do so without having to suffer some ridiculous stigma about "damaging" the climate with my "carbon footprint." Sorry to all the treehuggers and other green psychos who don't understand that at least here in America, we are still supposed to be allowed "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If my pursuit of happiness means driving a big vehicle full of kids to school and other activities, then who's to say that I'm wrong or evil?

Hey, if people want to drive motorized roller-skates around that's fine by me, but just don't go around telling me that I have to do it too. And don't go around calling me evil and other bad names just because I don't want to drive a motorized roller-skate. And if I want to burn all the lights in my house all day long and pay the electric bill for it, then who are you to tell me that I'm killing the planet? Freedom allows us some self-interest and other people must realize that their freedom does not cross the line of my freedom. If I can afford to pay the price for "excessive" use of something, then that's my business and no one else's (except the seller of that something).

I once read something by a very communistic totalitarian type of person that said he thought it would be a good idea to limit the whole world's fertility rate, i.e. limit the number of children everyone can have, and to let the poor women of the world "sell" their birth rights (to have babies) to women in wealthy countries who want more kids than they are "allowed". This was supposed to be a way to control population growth in the world because he thinks that overpopulation is the root of all the "climate changes" and "resource scarcity" and also a way to "redistribute wealth" around the world. Well, let's think about it a moment. If it's okay for someone to sell her fertility and for someone else to buy it, then how is it bad or wrong for someone to be able to buy more fuel and energy than they are "allowed"? Well, obviously, there is no real difference and the communistic totalitarian (meaning limiting freedoms) arguments fall apart easily.

Green used to be one of my favorite colors, but now it's being hijacked by a bunch of rabid vegetarians* and communists. There is even a new TV network, Planet Green. Well, that's fine and maybe it will have some good things on it, but let's not allow "greenness" to become the new reversed McCarthyism in which those who don't fit the "green" expectations of others are targeted as criminals and their lives ruined.

Just the other night I was watching a "green" show about alternative energy sources. It had some very interesting new developments, especially in solar power. They are developing much smaller and more efficient solar collecting "film" that is flexible and could be used in many applications that older panels can't. Well, this is certainly an exciting idea and one that should definitely be promoted. One application they talked about was embedding these in roofing materials, and when it's time to replace my roof I would be interested in such a product if it's available and not prohibitively expensive. I think it's great when the "greens" put their money and effort where their mouths are by actually working on solutions and improvements instead of dictating how everyone else should live. And that's how freedom should work.

*I have nothing against vegetarians, only rabid ones. ;-)


mr_g said...

And not all of us left wing psychos are vegetarians. I had some damn good steak and shrimp last night and maybe even paid a little too much for it - another right as an American consumer. ;-)

Seriously though, I find it hard to ignore the notion that we make the planet better or worse for ourselves and future generations based on how we treat it...regardless of our right to do something.

I mean, if I'm too drunk to get off the couch, which I'm within my rights to become, I also have a right to piss on my living room floor. Hell, I have a right to do it every night if I want. Though it's probably not the healthiest thing for me or my home environment, it's certainly my right.

Just sayin.....just because we CAN do something, doesn't mean we all should.

Rae Ann said...

How does your argument hold up in regards to any other activities? Porn? Pot? Eating steak and shrimp? (which many greens are telling us is just as damaging to the environment as driving SUVs) My point is that we can't allow a group of alarmists whose arguments are based on bad science to go around dictating to everyone how we should live. There really is not any indisputable evidence that our "carbon emissions" are causing harm or that they will. I've been following this issue closely for a long time and facts are facts. Al Gore, et al, are only feeding people a bunch of garbage and lies meant to scare and control them. As a liberal you should be more worried about that than about who's driving what and so on. Don't you agree?

mr_g said...

Well, I certainly have better things to worry about than who is driving what. As liberal as I may be in some areas, I have rather libertarian leanings when it comes to personal freedoms - including SUVs, pot, gay marriage and owning firearms to protect oneself. And to be honest, with regard to saving the planet, my long-standing view has been this:

The planet is going nowhere. At some point, if we're not careful, the planet will expel its parasites with natural disasters, severe climate changes or the like. Some creatures will survive and be the start of the next round. The only questions are "when" and "what can we do to not let it happen in our lifetimes".

We all pollute to some degree. We each do our parts to drain some infinitesimal amount of our environmental resources. I'd be willing to bet, however, that the emissions from a bong are less hazardous to the environment than, say, a hummer. (And I mean the vehicle - the other kind does nothing but good for the environment.) However, I'm no scientist - just a guy who doesn't really fit well into a political "party category".

Rae Ann said...

LOL, and you're pretty funny too. :-) I'm all for evolution. Let's just live and let our descendents adapt to whatever changes. ;-)