Tag Archives: politics

The New Royalty

The other day I was reading an essay by Victor Davis Hanson wherein he addressed the question: Why do our wealthy, liberal elite love a tax-happy, environmentally-expensive Obama? “The Discreet Charm of the Left-wing Plutocracy”, posted 11/9/09 suggests it’s a number of things, more prominently penance and big money.

In the essay, he cites Al Gore, Michael Moore, John Edwards, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and others as the liberal elites, all of whom have a great deal of money and live like it. As Hanson pointed out, the billions Al Gore has made from his the carbon offsets business, designed to give hope to the fearful and to assuage the consciences of the guilty, fear and guilt being the result of his incessant sky is falling, global warming claims, have given him the ability to live a life quite at odds with the lifestyle he urges upon others. While we should be restricted to solar-powered, 1000 square foot homes, ride bicycles and take trains for longer journeys, Gore supports a mansion and a fleet of airplanes to jet him about the country. Michael Moore, John Edwards, Nancy Pelosi, Sean Penn and the Kennedy Dynasty share similar contradictory lifestyles. As I read of their mansions, their limousines, their jets, their jewels and clothing, their nightlife and overall high level of living juxtaposed against a rhetoric that supposedly identifies them with the poor and downtrodden — all the while disdaining “commoners” like Sarah Palin and Joe the Plummer, it occurred to me that these people are America’s version of Old World royalty.

They do whatever they want, and regard it as a given that those who are under their rule should have no say. They only have to pay their taxes, or as in olden times, their tribute and their fealty. The new royalty, who live like kings and lords of old, are justified in doing so because they are so concerned with helping the little people, the unwashed masses they want nothing to do with in the practical. Thus, a king or lord had the right to use his money to build a bunch of expensive gardens, amass an expensive collection fine art produced by the artist his court has sponsored, to go about in gold-gilt carriages with an entourage of similarly outfitted “noblemen” and who of the serfs had any right to criticize. He is the king or the lord. They are serfs. They have no rights; they have only to pay what is due.

This is what our forefathers left England to escape. They came here to be free of confiscatory taxation, taxation without representation, deals cut out of the public eye, in the salons of the wealthy and the so-called noble. Our forefathers came here to build a new nation that was not beholden to royalty, where no man was considered better than another simply because of his birth. Kings were no better, no smarter, no more deserving of respect than commoners. All were equal before the law. So it was no wonder that our first President, George Washington refused to bow to foreign royalty, a tradition continued by all presidents which followed him. Except one.

If you’d like to read Hanson’s essay, it’s here.

Quote Of Note: Con Men and the Gullible

“Con men understand that their job is not to use facts to convince skeptics but to use words to help the gullible to believe what they want to believe.

“No message has been more welcomed by the gullible, in countries around the world, than the promise of something for nothing. 

 ~Thomas Sowell

(From his September 11, 2009  National Review Online article “Charlatan-in-Chief“)

Climate Change Denial

Oh brother!

I was just perusing the Drudge Report  and clicked on a link to an article from Reuters about the pyschological barriers that are preventing the American people from taking action on preventing climate change. “Psychological Barriers Hobble Climate Action,” shouts the headline.

But first, here’s a photo to get you in the mood to take action: Monument Valley. Looks pretty dry and hot doesn’t it? I think it was only in the upper 90’s when we drove through. Unlike Tucson which was 107 when we left…

Monument Valley 2

Yes, I’ve digressed a bit, but in so doing I’ve simulated the delay as I waited for the page to come up…

I started reading. Right off the article merely hinted as to what the barriers were (“insecurity, mistrust and denial”) before rushing to say that policy makers, scientists and marketers will need to look at these barriers in order to figure out how to circumvent them and persuade people to become more “urgent” about this matter. For some reason, even though scientists have warned people that unless they do something the sky is going to fall — Or burn up. Or evaporate. Or something — people remain relatively indifferent and non urgent. This is a travesty!

And then four paragraphs in it says this:

“Numerous psychological barriers are to blame, the task force found, including: uncertainty over climate change, mistrust of the messages about risk from scientists or government officials, denial that climate change is occurring or that it is related to human activity.”

So, uncertainty that climate change is real is a psychological barrier???

Doubt that the scientists’ and government’s warnings are legitimate is a psychological barrier? Disbelief that climate change is related to human activity? A psychological barrier?

Those aren’t psychological barriers but legitimate disagreements as to what the facts in the case are and what a reasonable conclusion based on those facts might be.

Are facts no longer relevant? Is truth no longer the issue? Is it all about marketing and presentation and “psychological barriers” to being persuaded?

Hmm. Why, yes, in some quarters I believe it is. And, oh look! They didn’t report the conclusion that climate change is not something humans can change as “doubt” but as “denial.”  As if the facts were already set in stone, it’s a wrap, all the evidence is in and supports anthropoecentric global warning and people are just deliberately turning a blind eye.

When that’s not it at all. The evidence does nothing of the kind. More and more scientists from climate related fields are challenging AlGore’s theory with actual facts and evidence, and critiquing the faulty collection methods of some of the data he uses to support it.

For example, the temperatures gathered by weather stations in various locations — eg, Russia — that were irregularly manned and so the temps from one month (September) were just written in for the next month (October) which would not surprisingly raise the average for the year.

Even aside from this, the temperature fluctuations over the past decades don’t track at all with a rise in carbon dioxide (produced by plants, animals, humans, even the ground; to say nothing of volcanoes) but it does track very closely with sunspot activity, as I think I’ve blogged on before. There isn’t a whole lot we’re gonna do about altering sunspot activity.

So the people are starting to hear the other side of the story, the one with the facts. They’re starting to hear that a whole passel of scientists aren’t buying into the party line about man-caused global warming and naturally are beginning to doubt the whole thing, yet here they’re reported as being in “denial.”

Wow.

How about another picture from Monument Valley? This time coming in from the north:

MV North web

Read the article: Psychological Barriers Hobble Climate Action