This is all about pushing the Green New Deal (something AOC refuses to demand a vote on) to control your life
The media coverage of the Green New Deal, a plan unveiled by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other members of Congress to overhaul the U.S. economy by investing in renewable energy and green jobs, focused as much on its reception as on its substance. Republicans panned it as socialism. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi mocked it. Many columnists, such as the New York Times’ David Brooks, criticized its heavy reliance on public spending and government-provided jobs. Other critics questioned the plan’s broad focus. What, they asked, did provision of medical care have to do with overhauling America’s energy network?
The casual observer could be forgiven for dismissing the plan and the response to it, especially because it has no chance of passing in the current Congress. But the plan is a sign of a larger shift in environmental thinking. There is a growing recognition of the need for structural changes to address the climate crisis and other serious environmental problems. An increasing number of influential office holders and thinkers are calling for policies that go far beyond mere tinkering. To overhaul our energy system and preserve threatened ecosystems, they recognize that we must aggressively disrupt the status quo.
It’s not a shift, the Cult of Climastrology has long been advocates of massive Big Government control. It’s just that, now, the big wigs and lawmakers and such are willing to admit it and push it.
The best part of the Green New Deal is its insistence on bold steps to slow climate change and develop an economy based on renewable energy. As its name suggests, the plan is predicated on the idea that individual behavioral change will not lead to sharp reductions in greenhouse emissions or deliver meaningful environmental progress in other areas. We must, its authors insist, overhaul our economy to meet our environmental responsibilities. Even those who question this premise should celebrate the plan’s audacious goals.
Strange that the word “Fascism” never appears in this piece. Or anything about this being the system authoritarian government use.
Other environmental thinkers echo this skepticism about behavioral change. David Wallace-Wells, author of a recent bookon climate change, concludes, “The effects of individual lifestyle choices are ultimately trivial compared with what politics can achieve.†While Wallace-Wells may find fault with some aspects of the Green New Deal, including its silence regarding nuclear power, he enthusiastically endorses the need to think big.
Which is an excuse for Warmists to never practice what they preach. And, because almost none practice what they preach, Government must force people to live a certain lifestyle, take their money, and take their liberty.
The emphasis on the need to overhaul our economic, technological and social systems is a welcome departure from the fixation with individual behavior that often dominates popular environmental discourse. The furor over use of plastic straws, which became a litmus test of environmental responsibility in some circles over the past couple of years, suggests the limitations of this preoccupation with individual action. Americans concerned about excessive use of plastic should worry much more about laws recently passed by several states that ban municipalities from imposing bans on plastic bag distribution in retail stores than about whether the diner at the next table is using a plastic straw. To make substantial environmental progress we must get beyond environmental narcissism — excessive concern about the consumption habits of ourselves and our family and friends. We must focus our efforts not on changing our individual behavior but on far-reaching communal changes.
Nothing spine-chilling about that, eh, unless you aren’t a fan of freedom, liberty, choice.
This continues on for a bit, ending on
Ultimately, the most important thing that we can do as citizens is to change the systems that pollute the Earth. Those in the vanguard of the environmental revolution that we so desperately need will not spend their waking hours discussing the finer points of eschewing plastic straws. They will be pounding on the doors of their congressional representatives to demand the wide-ranging changes that only government, directly or indirectly, can deliver.
“Please, Government Person, take my money and control my life.” These people are nuts.
This is why our good friend Mr Dowd has never told us what he, personally, has done to reduce his ‘carbon footprint’: the left have become so enamored with the fascist notion that Teh Government will solve all of our problems that the notion of individual responsibility has simply disappeared from their ideas.
Me? I’ve told the Cove dwellers what I have done, even though my motivations were not to combat
global warmingclimate change, but to save money and make the farm safer and more secure. They’ve been simple things, but we don’t see the left telling us what they have done.A lot of the Left live in cities like Hamsters so they have little carbon margins to adjust. it’s not until you move out into the suburbs, or move out of your parent’s basement, that you have a footprint of your own to worry about.
It’s the same excuse when they ask billionaires who demand higher taxes why they don’t just pay higher taxes voluntarily. “Individual action is meaningless”.