I found this on Black and Right and decided to comment on it here.
We live in an age where the argument is frequently driven not by logic or fact but by the “controversial nature” of the sound byte.
So Al Gore compares AGW sceptics to the KuKluxKlan. His point presumably is that the “deniers” are clinging to a superseded world view that is morally wrong and discredited.
Except that we are not talking about the KuKluxKlan we are talking about CO2. We are talking about public energy policy. So talk about science and utility and economics, not guys in white sheets out of Birth of a Nation. Of course there can be a moral context to public policy but it is not going to be as clear cut as he wants it. If there was solid science behind AGW than you could make the argument that failure to act could have a damaging impact on a future generation. There may be a moral argument there. I know just enough philosophy to know that is a long serious debate.
But don’t forget there is a compelling moral argument against badly thought out “do-good” actions that benefit a few hyper rich individuals while driving up the cost of energy for the rest of us. Especially the poor. Making cars harder to come by, coal supplied energy scarcer, and electricity more expensive can easily be argued as immoral. Let’s look at Cash For Clunkers, a program designed to “help the environment” and the economy by getting older cars off the road. I, for one, found Cash For Clunkers to be immoral. Why?
Well, it drove up the price of used cars so that first-time buyers and poorer buyers had real trouble finding vehicles with which to get to work. I know a guy who could not find the car he wanted for months because of CFC.
Since the cars were destroyed, both the cars and the component parts were off the market making it harder to find parts for people on lower incomes. The available parts were pricier.
The cars that were redeemed were paid for and operating so the program pulled forward demand and took perfectly good vehicles off the street. Pulled forward demand meant the car companies built more cars based only on subsidized demand which meant they were hurt once the rug was pulled out.
It was paid for with tax money so I was coerced into buying your new car which you didn’t need and wouldn’t have purchased unless my money was extorted from me and given to you. My tax money was thus used to hurt me and poorer people in one swipe. There was also a nasty surprise for the buyers because the tax burden on the “gift” was real and large.
Of course in the Al Gore world of argument I would say that President Obama was like Hitler bribing Germans with Volkswagens while his Stalinist minions swept across the land like man-eating locusts (Hitler and Stalin in a two-fer) and Gore would call me an anti-American killer of future generations because I was opposed to removing “clunkers” from the street and allowing industry to flourish. BLECH
To return to climate change. We need the arguments and should debate the science. But is has nothing to do with the late Sen Robert Byrd, Hugo Black or any other Klansman turned Democrat luminary. Let them rest, whether in peace or in hell.