Log In | Register
Charles Krauthammer explains the migration of the Left into environmentalism. The totalitarian impulse is the same.
Krauthammer wrote, "This naked assertion of vast executive power in the name of the environment is the perfect fulfillment of the prediction of Czech President (and economist) Vaclav Klaus that environmentalism is becoming the new socialism, i.e., the totemic ideal in the name of which government seizes the commanding heights of the economy and society."
The new socialism- from red to green by Charles Krauthammer
Seeded on Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:53 PM EST
Article Source: The Washington Post- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (3)
Not everyone is pleased with the coming New Carbon-Free International Order. When the Obama administration signaled (in a gesture to Copenhagen) a U.S. commitment to major cuts in carbon emissions, Democratic Sen. Jim Webb wrote the president protesting that he lacks the authority to do so unilaterally. That requires congressional concurrence by legislation or treaty.
With the Senate blocking President Obama's cap-and-trade carbon legislation, the EPA coup d'etat served as the administration's loud response to Webb: The hell we can't. With this EPA "endangerment" finding, we can do as we wish with carbon. Either the Senate passes cap-and-trade, or the EPA will impose even more draconian measures: all cap, no trade.
"Having decisively lost the great debate between capitalism and socialism, the only way the global warming socialists can do this is by imposing restrictions on U.S. output in response to the ginned-up "emergency" of global warming." [1] This opinion, however, is not the most politically-correct at the moment but brutally honest, to which I applaud. Krauthammer on the other hand explained this same circumstance "Socialism having failed so spectacularly, the left was adrift until it struck upon a brilliant gambit: metamorphosis from red to green."
[1} IBD, editorial 12/11/09
- 2 votes
#1 - Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:22 PM ESTKrauthammer really doesn't get it...
Perhaps he should read a recent op-ed in the NY Times by Tom Friedman in which he had some intresting observations, including...
If we prepare for climate change by building a clean-power economy, but climate change turns out to be a hoax, what would be the result? Well, during a transition period, we would have higher energy prices. But gradually we would be driving battery-powered electric cars and powering more and more of our homes and factories with wind, solar, nuclear and second-generation biofuels. We would be much less dependent on oil dictators who have drawn a bull’s-eye on our backs; our trade deficit would improve; the dollar would strengthen; and the air we breathe would be cleaner. In short, as a country, we would be stronger, more innovative and more energy independent.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=2
#2 - Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:37 PM ESTSuperSaiyan#2,
Tom Friedman is a staunch proponent of "green" and he devoted many of his columns to this same subject, covering not just US, but other countries such as India and Middle East. Friedman is unshakably biased in the subject of "green". Based on all I have read of Friedman's columns and books, he had not convinced me that he is at all open to the alternative position, specifically the destruction to the economy and our liberty in the name of green. To that end, Friedman feels that the end justifies the means. That said, I love his book "The World is Flat".
Thank you for sharing.
- 2 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
