“Climate Strike” strikes all the wrong notes

I don’t doubt the sincerity of the thousands (millions?) who are participating in the Climate Strike today. But I think many of you have been misled. At least I am *hoping* that is the case.

 

Robert Colvile is Director of the Centre for Policy Studies, a conservative British think tank. He pulls the mask off of the Global Climate Strike movement in this quick series.

 

I’m getting the same vibe that I did from the thousands of participants in the Women’s March a couple of years ago. Many did not know there were marching at the behest of a virulently anti-Semitic group.

 

These marches aren’t about saving the planet – it’s about ‘climate justice’. ‘reparations’. It’s about ending all fossil fuels. It about the outright rejection of more moderate proposals like Geoengineering, Carbon Capture and Storage, Biofuels and Smart agriculture. It is also the rejection of market forces, economics or technology to cut carbon emissions.

If you don’t believe that, simply go to the Global Climate Strike website and read their goals…and check out some of their “interesting” links.

 

Colville notes the Global Climate Strike movement’s goals are, “To facilitate and support non-market approaches to climate action”, support “environmentally sound, socially acceptable, gender responsive and equitable climate technologies.”

 

These are the ramblings of an SJW hopped up on Caramel Maccihatos…not seriously policy goals.

 

Colville correctly calls it, ‘utopian authoritarianism’ – the idea that the only way to save the planet is for people on the left to command others, in the developed and developing world, to live poorer, meaner lives.

 

Climate Change policy means you import the entire progressive agenda into the conversation about how to protect the environment, ensuring no conservatives are interested.  That way you can attack conservatives as “anti-science.” Cute strategy.  We’re not buying it.

We saw something similar happen with the seventies when hard leftists took over the environmental movement.  That forced your elderly neighbor who simply wanted clean fishing waters to break bread with neo-Marxists who wanted to essentially eliminate the very concept of Private Property.

I will repeat something I have said a thousand times.  I have no beef with Climate scientists who are simply offering up data from their research.  My issue is with those who interpret that data as an excuse to enact policies that would (in many cases) change the fundamental relationship between The Individual and The State.

So…fire up the McCullough!