"We are going to have to look how authoritarian decisions based on consensus science can be implemented to contain greenhouse emissions. It is not that we do not tolerate such decisions in the very heart of our society, in wide range of enterprises from corporate empires to emergency and intensive care units. If we do not act urgently we may find we have chosen total liberty rather than life."
David Shearman is an Australian Professor who is very concerned about climate issues. I am not a total skeptic on global warming. I am, however, a skeptic on fear mongering. To me, it seems that global warming has become the latest reason a self appointed elite trumpet to prove that they need to be in charge of things. This group of enlightened individuals will step up and makes decisions for the rest of us, doling out scarce resources as they see fit, rather than trying to find replacements.
This is simply the old Marxist and fascist wine in the biodegradable bottle of environmentalism.
Posts
3 comments:
I am not a total septic on global warming.
Now there's a freudian typo with some real clout to it! [emphasis added]
Oops!
Be nice, I am a public school product!
Anthony--
The quote below, from the article to which you link is demonstrative of the reason why I said that "Catholic Libertarian" is oxymoronic.
As the author points out, there is a choice to be made between acceptance of authoritarian decisions and insisting upon total liberty at the price continued degradation of life on earth.
The word "authoritarian" should not disturb a Catholic in this context. It does not equate to "totalitarian." What it means is that there exists in the realm of science a "scientific magisterium" to the authority of which we, who are not scientists, but merely students and supporters of scientists, must turn to obtain the truth and the proper course of action.
The Chinese decision on shopping bags is authoritarian and contrasts with the voluntary non-effective solutions put forward in most Western democracies. We are going to have to look how authoritarian decisions based on consensus science can be implemented to contain greenhouse emissions. It is not that we do not tolerate such decisions in the very heart of our society, in wide range of enterprises from corporate empires to emergency and intensive care units. If we do not act urgently we may find we have chosen total liberty rather than life. [emphasis added]
The conflict between authority and liberty becomes clear in any situation necessitating a moral decision, whether in the context of religion or of society-at-large.
Post a Comment