Broken people

For someone on the right, the people on the left have a decidedly crazy look about them. Not all, of course, but far too many. Here is an interesting article on The Leftist Mind Explained. The article was inspired by a comment from Glenn Reynolds where he wrote, “I’m beginning to think that most lefty movements are just about broken people trying to manipulate the rest of us so they can feel good about their broken selves.” It stuck with me as well since you really do want to make some kind of sense of behaviours and beliefs that are both clearly wrong and clearly destructive. This is how the article ends:

They all desire, in the kinds of abject Loneliness that fills their Souls like a diseased bile, to drag all of us down into the cesspit of their types of pathological Miseries. They are the armies of The Culture Of Death, the vanguard of Nihilism.

For centuries, the Western World was able to keep such attitudes confined to a small number of the population. With the spread and acceptance of Leftist Thinking in the last two hundred years, however, these various perverse ways of approaching Life have ascended to domination, a Hegemony Of Perversity, if you will. The reasons for this triumph are many, but they all bespeak of a Civilization that is in decline, one that is slowly committing suicide.

Well, maybe. I don’t know what drives them but I do know they terrify me. They are everywhere and if they cannot be stopped they will be the ruin of us.

Dangerous lunatics in politics

There are, it seems, quite a few of them. In this case, we are talking about Robert Kennedy Jr who is found to have said this:

Those who contend that global warming “does not exist,” Kennedy claimed, are guilty of “a criminal offense — and they ought to be serving time for it.”

He knows nothing about the climate, he knows nothing about constitutional protection, and he knows nothing about the problems that beset the US amongst which global warming must be next to last.

Tony Blair’s comprehensive strategy to counter religious extremism

Tony Blair’s seven principles in dealing with religious extremism, via John McTernan:

– Join the Dots. It is One Struggle
– The Problem is Getting Worse, Not Better
– The Challenge is a Spectrum, not Simply a Fringe
– Fight the Fringe; Speak Out against the Spectrum
– Support Modern-minded Muslim Opinion. They Are Our Allies
– East and West Should Work Together
– Education is a Security Issue

Here is Blair’s full essay.

Hillary Clinton – Saul Alinsky correspondence revealed

This is with certainty going to be a small story when it should be immense. The Hillary Letters tell us everything we ought to need to know to wish she never becomes president:

Previously unpublished correspondence between Hillary Clinton and the late left-wing organizer Saul Alinsky reveal new details about her relationship with the controversial Chicago activist and shed light on her early ideological development.

That she, like Obama, is on the far-left is perfectly clear to anyone who understands what being an Alinskyite means. Those who have been that way inclined at some stage in their lives, when they walk away from it are forever aware of both the power and the danger of such ideas. That Hillary and Obama have no record of having abandoned any of this is as good an indication of their current beliefs as one could have. That both have pursued policies as far to the left as could be imagined in a nation in which more than half the population describe themselves as conservative is only possible because of the media cover they receive. No one will ask, of course, but it would be interesting to find out her reaction to things like this:

“Dear Saul,

“When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out—or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation?

“I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people.

All this is hidden right before our eyes. It will not end well.

You can read the actual letters here.

Suppose the planet is cooling and not warming

You can find at Quadrant Online a review, taken from the magazine, of Twilight of Abundance by an Australian, David Archibald, that for me was one of the most devastating critiques of the global warming hysteria I have ever read. What made it so extraordinary is not that it began from the premise that global warming is a con and that the planet is not warming and whatever temperature changes there may be are only to a very slight degree affected by human industrial activity. Lots of people say that so there would be nothing new if all he did was add his name to the chorus. Making the book somewhat more remarkable is that he began from the premise that the planet may be cooling and not warming at all which while still unusual is not all that unusual any longer since the evidence of potentially falling temperatures is all around us (did you see, for example, the level of ice cover on Lake Superior in June?).

What, in fact, made the book extraordinary is that he combines the possibility of global cooling with every other green scare I have ever come across, but does it in a way that I find plausible. What he argues is that if we end up with falling temperatures, contracted growing seasons, resource depletion, energy shortages and an over-populated planet, the result is the kind of catastrophe once forecast by Paul Ehrlich which he described as the population bomb. Here is Ehrlich’s famous first sentence, published in 1968, that has kept his name before the public ever since:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.

None of this happened, of course, so that I along with many others have become inured to the arguments of catastrophists of every kind. And every one of these has been wrong, including the global warming crowd, for whom the only evidence they ever had has evaporated over the years since around 1999. The planet is not warming even though greenhouse gases continue to pour into the atmosphere. So what exactly are Archibald’s credentials to be discussing any of this:

David Archibald is a Perth, Australia-based scientist working in the fields of oil exploration, climate science, energy and geostrategy. After graduating from Queensland University in geology in 1979, he worked in coal and oil shale exploration in Queensland and then in oil exploration with Exxon in Sydney. A long period in stockbroking in Sydney as an analyst was followed by moving to Perth in 1999 to work for a private investor. He subsequently started the oil exploration company Oilex in 2003 and then joined a Canadian-listed oil exploration company in 2006. Also at that time, he was CEO of the mineral explorer Westgold Resources.

What intrigued me about Twilight of Abundance is that it has proposed an equal and opposite future to everything that the greens have come up with that, if true, is something that is truly frightening. And given that there is as much if not more plausibility in what he has written than in the entire green-AGW campaign which has been discredited at every turn, one wonders why this is not now being thought about as one possible future that needs to be taken on board.

I have been astonished myself that during my lifetime, the population of the world has gone up from around two billion to seven billion. If this has been a consequence of an abnormally warmer climate, the Green Revolution and the abundance of cheap energy, then we should be thinking about what might happen if the warm weather disappears while the cheap energy provided by carbon-based fuels are depleted.

The Greens as well as other parties to the left have grabbed hold of global warming as one more vehicle to attack market economies and give them political power. If Archibald is anywhere near right, it will only be those economies that are capable of adjusting in the face of new circumstances that will avoid the disasters that would follow. I therefore invite you to read the review, and then the book after that. Since none of us know what is really happening, this is one conjecture that ought to be put on everyone’s watch list since things could turn very nasty more quickly and in ways quite different from what most people at the present time are prepared to believe.

Constitutions are about setting the rules of the political game not outcomes

Here’s why we should go nowhere near amending the constitution. These are the opening words of a story in The Australian today on constitutional change:

AUSTRALIANS want to address inequality in the Constitution . . .

We are now such a low grade constituency who cannot tell the difference between setting up the rules for governing ourselves and fixing some particular problem that captures our fancy at the moment. I can hardly think of anything that has less place in a constitution than trying to make ours a less unequal society. Merely raising the spectre of such a divisive question as a constitutional matter makes me very nervous about how capable we now are of dealing with such a serious issue in a serious way.

Closing shop

There is a kind of glibness in this presentation of “The Great Unravelling”. They don’t really believe it, but I do.

Then there is this article about a CBC program warning Canadians that cash may be seized from them by “law enforcement” officers in the US and is quite an eye opener. The title says it all: Canadian News Outlet Warns Canadians That US Law Enforcement Officers Will Pull Them Over And Seize Their Cash. Thus in answering the question posed in the video, this is from the comments:

this country is closing up shop. won’t be here 50 years from now

The wolves are circling but no one seems to be paying attention. Nothing lasts forever, but the fracturing of the United States is happening before our very eyes, something I never thought even remotely possible not all that long ago. The question is no longer will it fall apart, but how can it be made whole again? To this I cannot think of any answer at all. And while the decay is not as advanced in Australia, without the US where do we go from there? What’s fifty years in the scheme of things? Most people alive today will still be alive then. Lots of surprises but there is a brutality in history that you would not want to ignore.

[Both the video and the story from Instapundit]

Value added – a Q&A

I received this query from a student:

I was thinking about value added, the other day, and started thinking about second hand books.

Now, the process to get to a new book, has added value, from resources such as trees, ink etc, throughout the chain, to be sold brand new in a book store (for example). A person enters the store, purchases the book, with the intention to read the book.

They buy it for 10 dollars, then read it, fully consuming the value that they have purchased it for.

Then, they later choose to sell it again, at a price of 5 dollars. Is this value added? I mean… they have already consumed the full 10 dollars of value that they initially purchased the book for the purpose of. Now they are making an additional 5 dollars.

OR

Is it the creation of a new product, from new resources? Ie. In reading the book/consuming the book, the person has realised it’s value. What is left is now just a resource. They then sell this resource in the market for a new price.

OR

Is it value reduction, as they sell it for a lower price than they buy it for?

To which I replied:

Nice.

Adding value means moving resources into a position or into some form so that they can better add to someone’s utility. When you bought the book, there was no value added by you, although there had been by the bookseller in doing whatever was required to make the book available. Reading the book gave you whatever pleasure it might have done and when you had finished it, there it lay. However to earn that later return, the book had to be shifted from your bedside where you left it when it was finished and moved to a position where it could be bought by someone else. So taking the book to the bookseller to resell was your contribution to the value adding process for which you received $5. Upon resale again, the bookseller again gets the $10 you originally paid, indicating that another $5 of value has been added to the process. Had you left the book undisturbed by the side of your bed, it could not have provided this additional $10’s worth of additional value, which was split between you and the bookseller.

Note that the original production costs of the book at no stage fit into the story.

Classical economics is just so clear headed.

Ideology makes young men dangerous

This is very well stated, from Theodore Dalrymple:

Youth, as everyone knows who has passed through it some time ago, is the age not of idealism but of self-importance, uncertainty masked by certitude and moral grandiosity untouched by experience of life — or, of course, the age of total insouciance. It is not surprising that ideology makes young men dangerous, for it is in the nature of ideology to answer all the difficult questions of human existence while giving believers the illusion of special understanding and destiny not available to others.

With the downfall of the Soviet Union, Marxism lost almost all of its appeal for hormonally disaffected young men of the West, leaving them bereft of significance and purpose. Except for one group among them, they now had only a potpourri of causes (sexism, racism, the environment, etc.), none of which quite met the need or filled the gap.

To find out what filled the gap, you need to go the article. And then there is this from an article by David Gelernter on Free Speech at Yale:

We all know that true free speech means freedom to shut up, especially if you disagree with your betters. And true free thought means freedom to stop thinking as soon as the official truth is announced by the proper Authorities — and freedom to wait patiently until then.

Now take this Ayaan Hirsi Ali. First of all, she’s a black woman, and they’re not quite ready for prime time, know what I mean? And she’s against the systematic abuse of women in Muslim societies. What about people who are for the systematic abuse of women in Muslim societies? Furthermore, she lacks “representative scholarly qualifications.” Want the whole campus flooded with quacks expressing their so-called opinions based on “experience” and “knowledge” instead of academic authority? And she’s Dutch. More or less. Enough said.

You can read the entire article as well along with this background piece.

Confound it

sea ice stats

Climate scientists are possibly the only people more surprised by how the world is unfolding than Keynesian economists:

ANTARCTIC sea ice has expan­ded to its greatest coverage since records began in 1978, continuing to confound climate scien­tists and proving even more hazardous than usual for shipping in the Southern Ocean.

Yet there is no one politically more dangerous than someone who has been shown to be wrong. Saving a billion or two makes no difference since nothing related to the real world will get these people to change their minds. There was then this the other day:

NOAA – 246 Low Max Records Broken or Tied From Sept 1 to Sept 10. Some records broken by 16F.

I’m sure that confounded a few people as well. The “I’m a Global Warmist and I Vote” crowd are doing an awful lot of harm but how do you stop it?