CNN: Winston Churchill Would Have Been A ‘Climate Change’ Believer Or Something

CNN gives a platform to Sir Nicholas Soames, a Conservative (different from American conservatives) member of the British Parliament since 1983. Looks like he’s forgotten that the primary political ideology of Classical Conservatives is government staying 100% out of the economy. But, then, people who’ve been in government for that long like government power to keep their jobs. The piece starts out by comparing the government of England and the U.S., and makes the typical mistake of conflating Doing Something about ‘climate change’ with actual environmental issues, till we get to

Dear President Trump: Churchill would have been a climate leader


The logic of the Prime Minister’s argument would seem to be inescapable. Whether you appreciate nature by admiring its beauty or by using it for hunting — I happen to like both — nature’s survival is not something on which we can rely. As with a marriage, keeping it alive takes work.

Previous American presidents of the political right appreciated this. Richard Nixon established the Environmental Protection Agency. Ronald Reagan ushered in the Marine Mammal Protection Act. George Bush signed a treaty known as the UN climate change convention.

All of these measures were perfectly in tune with the views of conservative philosopher Sir Roger Scruton that “there is no political cause more amenable to the conservative vision than that of the environment, for it touches on the three foundational ideas of our movement: trans-generational loyalty, the priority of the local and the search for home.”

But, the climate change scam is not the environment. Climate changes. Always has, always will. Nixon would certainly have heartburn over the way the EPA has been politically weaponized to control the lives and private property of U.S. citizens.

The key figure in starting all this was another Conservative figure for whom I hope the President would have some regard: Margaret Thatcher. And it has brought no threat to energy security, or to jobs.

Thatcher thought ‘climate change’, or anthropogenic global warming, as it was called back then, was a joke, and understood that this push was a far, far leftist attempt to create more control over citizens, economies, and nations.

My grandfather, Sir Winston Churchill, knew a thing or two about courage. President Trump is, I gather, a fan, having a bust of him in the Oval Office. Without Churchill’s determination, the Nazis would have won the war in Europe. But this is equally true of his respect for evidence. You cannot defeat an enemy of markedly superior forces unless you have better information and make better decisions.

Were he our Prime Minister today, it is pretty clear he would have said the same things on climate change as Theresa May has this week. Because, simply, she is right, and she is acting in the interests of her people.

That’s a nice thought, but, he would most likely have recognized that ‘climate change’ is a fascistic/socialist/progressive push. He would have seen the same type of big government control that he saw across the English Channel emanating from Germany and Italy. And a type rising to the east of Poland.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “CNN: Winston Churchill Would Have Been A ‘Climate Change’ Believer Or Something”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Also from the article:

    The best-performing nation on growth is also, notably, the best at cutting emissions.
    And it is… the UK. In that period, the average Briton has grown 45% wealthier, while reducing his/her carbon footprint by 33%. The USA has not done badly, coming mid-table on both measures.

    Your repetitive lie(s) that efforts to cut carbon pollution is a communist hoax to enslave the world’s poor and steal from the rich don’t serve you well. If you had any evidence at all you’d certainly have supplied it by now.

    Reining in global warming IS an environmental concern – nothing as global as global warming can be dealt with locally any more than the Montreal Protocol could have been.

    Is it cooperation that troubles you?

    In any event, you’ve won! The world will continue your experiment of dumping gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere and oceans and we’ll see what happens (as will our kids, grandkids and great-grandkids). Are you 100% confident that doubling or tripling atmospheric CO2 will not increase warming another 1, 2 or 4C? That’s the gamble you’re taking on the future.

Pirate's Cove