Has climate change replaced socialism as the dominant political divide?

With the US Presidential election still undeclared and the ALP joining the Liberals in tearing itself apart on climate policies and support for renewables, I had two pieces published today.

The first in the Australian (ungated version here) observed how a Biden victory “will bring increased pressure on us to introduce more regulations, subsidies and other measures to reduce domestic emissions. One upshot, aside from higher household electricity bills, will be closure or contraction of Australian industries previously benefiting from low cost energy. A corollary is lower living standards.”

The second article in The Spectator concluded, “Donald Trump, in renouncing the carbon agenda, was poised to undermine its stranglehold over all economies.  If the US now joins the EU in forcing others into a greater carbon abatement, Australia would need to incur even higher costs than the $13 billion a year its current climate-engendered energy policy imposes on the economy.  Extracting ourselves from this yoke will be a long haul.”

These developments on climate matters here and more importantly in the US seem to confirm a new variation of the enduring political divide between those seeking central controls over the economy and those favouring individual actions based on pursuit of individual gain and accompanied by firm property rights and small government.  The Russian Revolution came to represent one route and the American constitution (based on the ‘no taxation without representation” strictures in magna carta and the Parlement of Paris) the other.

Because claimed climate damage from emissions, though spurious, the emissions themselves are externalities, collateral global damage from the pursuit of individual gain. As with socialism, disproving the damage of emissions themselves and of the measures taken to reduce them takes decades.  Human induced global warming claims therefor provides a heaven-sent opportunity for those seeking economic and political controls.  Western nations’ educational and media institutions have embedded global warming as a cause for alarm among the young in particular.  And overcoming this can be made attractive because it can be aligned with (specious) claims that resolving it may actually advance economic prosperity – as it will for those able to syphon off benefits from others.  And visual evidence of people working on erecting wind farms and solar facilities can allow politicians and lobbyists to claim that the support for these facilities creates millions of “well-paying jobs”.

While other issues – fiscal matters, labour laws, immigration, and so on – retain their political importance, the dominant issues now surround climate change. And many government interventions have become re-clothed as measures to combat or adapt to this non-existent issue.

Energy controls (over fossil fuels) are, of course the best known.  But we see the same process with agricultural policy: regulations preventing land clearing have been reinvented as measures to prevent emissions; controls over irrigation, formerly based on bogus concerns over salinity, have been redefined as measures to reorientate the activity to the confected new reality of a changed climate and redirecting water to restore a suppose environmental arcadia.  We even see the long-standing planning constraints on new housing land releases, formally based on the need to combat “urban sprawl”, now redefined as a policy of adaptations approach to higher temperatures and lower rainfall.

The “watermelons” have been long recognised as a policy pressure that was amplified after the Fall of the Wall.  But green ideology has come to dominate the great political divide.  And it has brought whole new meanings, excitements and career paths to politicians, bureaucracies and NGOs.  It has long created a fragility in the Australian Liberal Party seen on the Abbott/Turnbull schism and it is now causing rifts within Labor.  Will we see these result in a formalisation of the existing political alignments?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Has climate change replaced socialism as the dominant political divide?

  1. Shaun says:

    Climate Change is socialism. They come from the same cloth.

  2. PK says:

    And meanwhile, China is chortling all the way to the bank.

  3. Roger says:

    The climate change “emergency” is merely a pretext to justify Socialism.

  4. a happy little debunker says:

    When you actually look at climate change policies and socialism there is not a sliver of difference between them…

  5. cohenite says:

    The chunk virus had one benefit: it caused a massive economic downturn and a consequent reduction of human emissions of CO2. Yet, atmospheric CO2 continued to rise unaffected. We had been told human CO2 is responsible for ALL the increase in atmospheric CO2 yet this phenomenon disproves that dead. So, even if you think CO2 controls climate it doesn’t matter because the increase in CO2 is natural.

    There are 3 types of alarmists: idiots, spivs and commies. Arseholes all.

  6. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Socialism has adopted global warming. It’s a perfect fit. One gives reason to the other to repress the people, and both are totally wrong. Leftie bastards hang out together, and in my experience all climatistas I know of are lefty.

    I wrote a comment this morning about the impossibility to compromise with the green-progressive religion. It is fanatical and totalitarian and millenarian. It has all the hallmarks of a cult. The only way to tackle it successfully is to bring them out one by one and deprogram them. Which is a hard ask since maybe a third of the population are hooked on it.

  7. PK says:

    career paths to politicians, bureaucracies and NGOs.

    The first two have, at least, some justification however flimsy. When is someone going to have the cojones to pull the teeth of the NGOs. Largely financed by taxpayers and with tax free status. Calling the shots and claiming the moral high ground. Demanding Government do their bidding with massive, and expensive, intrusion into the public debate (such as it is).
    Either have a very close re-examination of the requirement for tax free status or remove the category altogether. Greenpeace in NZ anyone?

  8. Ƶĩppʯ (ȊꞪꞨV) says:

    climate change is a tool by marxists to destroy the cheap energy production of the west and its comparative industrial advantage

  9. PK says:

    @ Bruce

    I wrote a comment this morning about the impossibility to compromise with the green-progressive religion. It is fanatical and totalitarian and millenarian. It has all the hallmarks of a cult. The only way to tackle it successfully is to bring them out one by one and deprogram them.

    God help me, as I got towards the end of the passage quoted, my feeble cognitive system had already substituted in the word ‘shoot’ for the word that eventually appeared. 🙂

  10. stackja says:

    Turn off coal power immediately. Rely on solar/wind. What could possibly go wrong? Greens insist all will be right.

  11. nb says:

    Shaun, #3655800 says: ‘Climate Change is socialism.’
    The precise phrase I was intending to write! Climate change is socialism.

  12. Albatross says:

    Shaun: game here to write this.

  13. Albatross says:

    *came

  14. Fat Tony says:

    Roger
    #3655820, posted on November 11, 2020 at 7:44 pm
    The climate change “emergency” is merely a pretext to justify Socialism.

    And socialism is a fig leaf for totalitarianism

  15. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Turn off coal power immediately. Rely on solar/wind. What could possibly go wrong? Greens insist all will be right.

    Stack, pls give me advanced warning so I can get a fuel bunker and a generator installed. In an underground camouflaged bunker, so the green nazis don’t come and confiscate them.

  16. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    Climate change ? Socialism? Theres adifference ?7

  17. Lee says:

    The vast majority of the MSM and every leftist has been telling us for months that a Biden victory would be very beneficial for Australia, and in our best interests.
    Sure, pull the other one.

  18. Squirrel says:

    Climate change has certainly provided an alternative for people who are uncomfortable with organised religions and are looking for an object for their religious instincts – so in that sense, it has replaced socialism as such as a political divide.

  19. Boxcar says:

    Bruce of Newcastle
    #3655829, posted on November 11, 2020 at 7:52 pm

    Socialism has adopted global warming. It’s a perfect fit.

    I’m more inclined to think politicians have adopted global warming. The evolution of the Political classes has all but eliminated individuals as “leaders”, with one notable exception, and replaced them with the likes of Rudd and Turnbull, who need crutches to underpin their lust for power.
    Climate change is a top down ideology to suit any one of these empty suits, mainly because it would not even exist but but for its origins in politics.
    But , bottom up, it’s a belief system, and developing similar structures to traditional religion.
    Wuflu has taught us all a lot about how much ordinary every day people want or need to believe in their “leaders”, regardless of the cognitive dissonance required to follow their gospels.
    Only last week country Victoria lived in terror on suburban visitors. Days later, at the word of Dan, it’s all over, and it is, gone.
    Gaia is the new god, and politicians are his/her/its prophets.
    For millenia, they have dreamed of having as much power as priests, and climate change will deliver it.
    The Greens will go the way of John the Baptist.

  20. Up The Workers! says:

    It seems to me that the simplest way to stop all “Climate Change” dead in its tracks, would be to “Arkancide”, “Bourdain” or “Epstein”, George Soros.

    There.

    Problem fixed.

  21. Biota says:

    support for these facilities creates millions of “well-paying jobs”.

    Low energy density jobs. Even more jobs could be created by having a few million peddling stationary power generating bicycles feeding into the grid.

  22. PB says:

    Today’s kids, raised as so many are with a deep spiritual void where religious faith, and the values stemming from that, used to be placed, are now seeking their sense of self and belonging through religious fervour for political dogmas. They are wide open for cult-level manipulation, which is exactly what we are seeing.

  23. one old bruce says:

    Climate Change is Original Sin.

    The idea is deeply embedded in western culture, especially that of northwest Europe where Pietism and Calvinism had a major impact.

    Basically agreeing with you PB, it’s religion without God, and for some reason Original Sin resonates deeply, especially among those of NW European Protestant ancestry.

    Which other culture in the world could accept the idea of human depravity? Even Catholics from Mediterranean countries, who may ritually recite ‘mea culpa’, never believed that humans are evil, that’s Calvin.

  24. flyingduk says:

    I recently read G Edward Griffins ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island’, which is an analysis of the whole worldwide central banking system.

    The book posits that our real rulers are international banking interests which are so powerful they act at a supranational level. It tells how the policital events of last several centuries can be explained by an endless need to create ‘crises’ which justify ever more borrowing and spending by national governments. At the outset, said crisis was usually war, and the people tolerated the restrictions and privations because war could be portrayed as an existential crisis.

    The nuclear bomb, however changed that, because war actually did become an existential crisis, even for the bankers, so it became necessary to invent a new ‘crisis’ to keep the borrowing and spending going. Various ideas were trialled: acid rain, global famine, global cooling, global warming and (yes-truly) pandemic.

    Agreed with the thesis or not, can someone point out to me where the above deviates from what is unfolding?

  25. Spurgeon Monkfish III says:

    I knew instinctively and immediately that catastrophic human induced climate change was a load of fact and evidence free anti-scientific marxist bullshit the first time I ever heard of it, which was over 30 years ago (when it was originally referred to as “global warming”*).

    That this monstrous preposterous fraud still exists and is now destroying wealth, living standards, jobs and livelihoods across the planet at an unprecedented rate is a damning indictment of humanity, especially those existing in the rapidly decaying so called liberal democracies of the West.

    Too stupid to survive.

    *Succeeding the equally preposterous scares of the ozone layer hole, acid rain and the imminent ice age widely spruiked in the 1970s.

  26. Bruce says:

    Once more, with feeling:

    “We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet. The world is looking to Korea for leadership.
    I’m glad that the Chairman of the forum and many other speakers have used my campaign slogan “Seal the Deal” in Copenhagen. I won’t charge them loyalty
    Ban Ki Moon.

    “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
    Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

    “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“
    Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation.

    “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
    Maurice Strong, Founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)

    “Yeah, complete revolution was on the table for this country and I think this green revolution has to pursue those same steps in stages.
    Van Jones

    “”To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.”
    Dr. Stephen Schneider, Greenhouse Superstar / Leading greenhouse advocate, in an interview for “Discover” magazine, Oct 1989

    No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
    Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment

    “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
    Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace.

    “I believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience.”
    Al Gore, “Climate Change” hysteric and multi-millionaire

    “But one must say clearly that we redistribute de-facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole”.
    Ottmar Edenhofer; UN IPCC OFFICIAL
    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate

    “We (UN-IPCC) redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…”
    “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore…”
    Dr Ottmar Endenhofer -, IPCC co-chair of Working Group 3, November 13, 2010.

    In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention . . . and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself . . . humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or . . . one invented for the purpose.
    Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution, The Club of Rome, p70, 1993

    We will continue to create and tell new stories about climate change and mobilize them in support of our projects.
    Michael Hulme, the founding director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and a co-ordinating lead author for the chapter on Climate Scenario Development (3rd IPCC Report).

    Government in the future will be based upon . . . a supreme office of the biosphere. The office will comprise specially trained philosopher/ecologists. These guardians will either rule themselves or advise an authoritarian government of policies based on their ecological training and philosophical sensitivities. These guardians will be specially trained for the task.
    David Shearman & Joseph Wayne Smith, The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy, p134, Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, USA, 2007. David Shearman was an IPCC Assessor for the third and fourth climate change reports.

    And so on, ad tyrannide.

  27. Bruce says:

    And, right on cue, der Golem elect declares the whole eco-nazi agenda as his top priority.

    Quelle sur&%@*ing-prise!

  28. Stan says:

    “Climate Change” is socialism, just a different name.

  29. Epicurious says:

    cohenite
    #3655827, posted on November 11, 2020 at 7:51 pm
    The chunk virus had one benefit: it caused a massive economic downturn and a consequent reduction of human emissions of CO2. Yet, atmospheric CO2 continued to rise unaffected.

    Can you please advise where to get the information, papers, etc on this. I’d like to upset the local watermelons through a letter to the editor of the local rag.

Comments are closed.