A powerful argument against climate alarmism
What does it mean? Do they assume that all countries would undergo a similar economic shock as was experienced by the central and eastern European countries after the fall of communism? Do they assume that economically weaker countries will stop their catching-up process? Do they intend to organise a decrease in the number of people living in Europe? Or do they expect a technological revolution of unheard-of proportions?What I see in Europe, the US and other countries is a powerful combination of irresponsibility and wishful thinking together with the strong belief in the possibility of changing the economic nature of things through a radical political project.
The author, Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, knows a little bit about the dangers of noble sounding totalitarianism, so I think that he is certainly worth listening to and taking seriously.
Certainly the earth’s climate is something that it is important we learn more about, and having an eventual goal of human control of global climate also seems reasonable (although I think a fair way away.) Additionally learning to produce energy in more more economically (and hence probably environmentally) less costly ways is an obvious good, and we should pursue that vigorously.
Going beyond that though, trying to impose artificial costs or make non-viable technologies viable through artificial stimulous (tax breaks, government subsidies, etc.) are simply bad ideas that will translate into real pain and suffering for individuals. Taken far enough, this philosophy demands total control of economic activity, and hence all human activity.
There is little more dangerous to freedom then a righteous crusader who is convinced that the sacrifices he demands of others is for the ultimate good.
(via the Anchoress)
