-----Original Message-----
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2013 3:31 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World

On 11/9/2013 3:09 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 9:55 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On 11/9/2013 9:37 AM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> Brent, my analogy, however badly its thought-up, is to force the 
>> idealists to produce. My idea was to force the idealist back to 
>> painful reality and hard choices, rather then mentally living in La 
>> La land. Saying  "Oh they're working on solar and soon.."
>>
>>
>> How about forcing the libertarians to painful reality.  They're going 
>> through the six stages of denial:
>>
>> 1. There is no global warming.
>> 2. The science is uncertain.
>> 3. There's global warming but it's just a natural cycle.
>> 4. Global warming will really be good for us.
>> 5. It's too costly to stop global warming.
>> 6. Nothing can be done.
>>
>> Most of them I know are stuck around 3 or 4 now.  They're hoping to 
>> delay any action so they can get to 6.  Why?  Because they'd rather 
>> face extinction than admit there are some things that you need government
to do.
> Brent,
>
> Out of curiosity: why do you care so much about what libertarians 
> think? They are a small minority. I believe most are very much aware 
> that big government is here to stay. Most people in the western world 
> vote for some variation of a conservative or liberal party, both 
> statist.
>
> Surely if you are right, and global warming is an existential threat, 
> and government intervention is the only way to solve it, what 
> libertarians think should be quite low in your list of concerns no?

Except that they have a disproportionate voice in the public debate because
their message is amplified by monied interests who depend on fossil fuel
(e.g. the Koch brothers).  
There was only a small number of lawyers, publicists, and scientists who
claimed that:

1. Smoking has nothing to do with lung cancer.
2. There may be a relation but the science is uncertain.
3. Lung cancer just occurs naturally.
4. There are new, healthier cigarettes.
5. It will hurt the economy to limit cigarettes.
6. People should be free to smoke if they want to.

and they delayed any government action against smoking for forty years.  In
fact some of them are *exactly* the same people hired to spread doubt about
global warming.  To undertake big government action in a democracy you need
a solid majority in the populace.  
>> As long as libertarians and oil companies can sow doubt that's enough to
prevent any action.

Well put. I would add that it is not only the current revenue streams these
fossil energy interests are protecting, but also perhaps even more
fundamentally they do this to protect the future valuation of the carbon
reserves they control. If the world got serious about global warming and
began to move away from carbon based fossil energy the valuation of these
reserves would plummet. This is a matter of many trillions of dollars of
evaluation that is counted in the asset column on their books.
Chris

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to