The dangerous and oppressive Fascism of the Green/Left

Post below lifted from The Anchoress

Buster and I had a lengthy drive yesterday and the subject of free speech, or, rather, suppression of speech, came up. We were talking specifically about his school environment, which has been becoming slowly but inexorably more Politically Correct in the past few years.

“The thing about being politically correct,” Buster said, “is that you have to be so damn careful about what you say, how you phrase a thing, because if you don’t get it just right, you’re immediately labled some sort of “ist” - racist, sexist, age-ist, size-ist. It leaves no room at all for normal human observation, and it discourages both thinking about a thing or even talking about a thing. And what worries me is - all these kids taking their regents and SAT’s - do they risk lowered grades if they dare express a thought that travels off the PC reservation? I have friends who will write a paper for Economics or Social Studies and the paper will reflect nothing at all of what they think, because they’re afraid of being penalized for thinking, or for exploring an idea. So, instead they just listen in class, gauge the teacher’s politics and then just parrot back what the teacher says to get the ‘A.’ I’m glad I’m graduating soon,” he mused, “but I expect it’s even worse in college, this sense of free speech and free thought being disallowed in favor of conformity and subordination of the self to whatever the hell power this is ruling the roost.”

I agreed with Buster that he will encounter more of this nonsense - and a more virulent strain of it - in college. “But it’s not just students who endure this,” I said. “Teachers also find themselves constricted by the demand that they conform to the politically correct (let’s just say it, ‘leftist’) orthodoxy if they want tenure. I told him about a long-time friend of ours, a high school social studies teacher who - before she got tenure - dared not offer an opinion outside of the (at that time) “Bush=evil, Kerry=genius” official line.

She did get tenure. She still tries not to opine very much among her fellow teachers who, because she remains silent rather than jumping into the “Bash-all-things-not-like-us” pool, have dubbed her “the token conservative,” and condescendingly allow that she is a fairly decent person, mostly, just very, very misguided. To some of them, she is an exotic creature - almost human!

“And, it’s not just teachers,” I told Buster. “In almost every job, now, even in the medical professions, you can find little orthodoxies that must not be trampled on at the cost of one’s livelihood or influence.”

“Well, I know we’re not supposed to use the word,” Buster said, “except, of course, when describing Conservatives in 21st Century America, but really, Ma, isn’t this sort of lock-step mentality, this obey-the-party or be-suspected-obey-the party or lose-your-job stuff what the Nazi’s did? Isn’t this fascism? Didn’t ordinary German’s find that if they did not conform to the demands of the Third Reich they’d be suspect, hounded from their jobs and all that?”

“Fascism is a very strong word, Buster,” I warned. It’s been thrown around way too loosely in the past few years. There are people who throw that word out anytime they encounter something with which they disagree. But…yes, your working definition of fascism is correct, and nowhere are we seeing that definition being played out more overtly than in the issue of ‘global warming.’

Now, I’m not saying that the earth isn’t warming up a bit, but I have serious disagreement with the “finding” that it’s all humanity’s fault, and on this subject, you’re expected to accept the whole narrative, or you’re a bad person. Did you know that a Weather Channel climatologist has said that any meteorologist who does not conform to the global warming narrative should be decertified?”

“You mean they should lose their jobs for dissenting?”

“Yes. Never mind that there is no consensus on global warming, or that plenty of scientists say it’s junk science. Since the hoo-hah global warming folks cannot convince everyone with hard facts and logic, they’re simply going to impose their will, and their myth, on the rest of the world. It’s sort of like Christians imposing Christianity on the world, which would be a bad thing…only these folks would impose the theology of their environmental religion on everyone, instead. And yes, that’s a kind of fascism.”

“So, other scientists should speak out,” said Buster.

“Not that easy, Grasshopper,” I replied. “When a formerly well-respected environmentalist like Bjorn Lomborg dared to dissent and wrote The Skeptical Environmentalist, he was sneered at and was suddenly considered less-than-credible. When Lomborg as invited by a newspaper to sit for an interview along with Al Gore - as a sort of balanced debate on the issue - Al Gore backed out because he could not control the debate. In that way, Lomborg did not get heard. It was a way to silence him. Michael Chrichton was a media darling until he took the time to seriously debunk global warming at which point he became something unclean.”

Buster stared out the window for a while, annoyed and pensive. “Look,” he said eventually, “you and Dad have always told us that we have to stand up and make an argument, that if our ideas are built on strong foundations they can stand up to poking and prodding and questions. This sounds to me like these folks don’t trust the foundation of their story and don’t want it looked at too closely. That’s troubling.”

“You mean,” I smiled, “they just want us to shut up and obey?”

“Yes…and that’s pretty funny when you think about it, because these people want us to shut up and obey, and yet they’re mostly the same folks who think ‘obedience’ to something like the Deity is a laughable idea. They’re the same people who think the president is too unilateral. So, they’re hypocrites. And who came up with the notion of global warming, anyway? Who coined that phrase? Do we even have a name we can link this to, some scientist, like Einstein, who founded this theory?”

Oh, kid, I thought to myself…you’re going to have a hell of a time in college….

“Well, yeah, there is a stench of hypocrisy to all of this,” I agreed. Nancy Pelosi, the very rich and the very powerful may use private jets with impunity because they’re very important people with some sort of moral superiority, so they’re allowed to - for example - burn 10,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per hour to get to their very important and morally unimpeachable events. You, however, may be told you’re a greedy resource pig if you decide to drive an SUV or use the wrong sorts of lightbulbs.”

Today when he comes home, Buster will learn that:

The Democrat frontrunner for the White House in ‘08 wants the government to seize an entire industry - the oil industry - and take control of it.

Governor Ted Kulongoski, D, of Oregon wants to essentially silence a state-employed climatologist who does not agree with the global warming narrative.

A Delaware climatologist who dissents is being accused, of course of working for Exxon, because no one can actually disagree with “global warming” science unless they’re being paid off. (No one ever asks who is paying Al Gore, btw. I will make sure Buster understands that the tactic of accusing someone to be mentally unfit or “paid off” is not new to the practice of either fascism or - for that matter - communism.)

The European Union - which is having trouble dealing with its own CO2 emissions allowances - is considering environmental crime statutes which will, let me go out on a limb, here and make a prediction, be aimed at the United States.

Interestingly enough, nowhere in the newspapers or on news broadcasts will Buster hear that President Clinton, faced with the Kyoto protocols in 1997, did not even bother submitting it to congress because he knew it was garbage. And the congress made a point of unanimously rejecting it, anyway. No, Buster will never hear that. He will hear, instead, that President Bush killed Kyoto and therefore killed Planet Earth.

There are lots of cold, hard facts about global warming that Buster can read, but he has to look for them on his own, because the press has completely bought into the narrative. Why?

Well…that’s a really good question. In the late sixties and early seventies, the press bought into the “Zero Population Growth” movement because Planet Earth was going to die in 20 years if people didn’t stop multiplying like some disease. Then they bought into the “Coming Ice Age” movement (all the same people, I think) because the earth was going to die in 20 years if people didn’t get serious about the global cooling.

As I wrote here: If the people promoting the hysteria on warming were serious - if the issue were a real one and not simply a political tool, then the hyper-concerned folks would be welcoming and heralding thoughtful environmental programs and helpful policies from any-and-all quarters, even - gasp - from the right. Even - gaspgasp - from George W. Bush. (You know, the guy who frees oppressed women and is cursed at by the feminists, the guy who keeps an eco-friendly ranch and is restoring the destroyed wetlands of Iraq and is hated by the enviros.)

You probably don’t know what I am talking about. You probably have no idea that President Bush has been working with China, India, Japan, South Korea and Australia on a creative - not Kyoto - environmental policy.
[…]
…the fact remains that if Al Gore or Bill Clinton or whoever else is ringing the sky-is-falling alarm bells were serious about Global Warming…if they really, actually believed that it was real, that it was, as Clinton says, “the most urgent issue of our time, more urgent than terrorism…” then rather than ignore this program, they’d have applauded this effort between co-operating nations.
[…]
So, you know…if the big boys of Global Warming aren’t really taking the issue seriously…if they find it so unserious as to allow the issue to be used as a political wedge or a rabble-rousing sound-bite, and that’s all…well, then I don’t have to take it seriously, either.

The Global Warming Hysteria Movement, complete with Media overhype, is not real. The proof is in the politics of it. It is a means to an end. To what end, I’m not sure.

As near as I can tell, it’s all about exciting legislation to take more control over individual liberties. And the irony, of course, is that the global warmingists - in a fast bit of projection and paranoia - have the floor, have the coverage, have the press quoting them at length, while they claim to be gagged by the evil and suppressive Bush administration. Meanwhile, Tim Robbins’ chill wind blows and blows and blows.

People’s thoughts, opinions and conclusions are being suppressed on this issue. Guess whose?

Is it fascism? I’ll leave that for others to decide.

Related reading:
University of Pennsylvania Prof: Al Gore is a Greenhouse Gasbag
The Paragraph Farmer: A Global Warming Thought Experiment
David Warren: Sekken
Fausta: Global Warming, Don’t I Wish
Don Surber: The Real Danger of Global Warming
Irish Pennants: Muzzle this Penn State Prof, quick!
Real Clear Politics: Bad Research, Worse Reporting on Global Warming
AJ Strata: Scientific Free Speech Dead in America
Randy Hall:A Bit of History for Global Warmers
Study: Greenland’s Glaciers have been shrinking for 100 years
Donald Sensing: What if Global Warming is a Good Thing?
Tim Blair: Growth Encouraged and Shunned
Siggy: Fertilizer for Evil
Selwyn Duke: The Temperature Also Rises
Dr. Sanity: The Totalitarian Mindset
More from Newsbusters
JR Dunn: Resisting Global Warming Panic
Crichton: The Environmental Speeches

Cheerleaders now incorrect at Australian football games



South Sydney co-owner Russell Crowe last night revealed his club had discarded its cheerleaders this season because they made male fans feel uncomfortable. The Hollywood star also said his wife, Danielle Spencer, supported the club's controversial move. Souths will this season replace cheerleaders with a drumming band during NRL home matches.

"Our focus is to re-establish rugby league and women," Crowe said. "The focus on game day should be a positive experience for the crowd. "We feel they (cheerleaders) made a lot of people uncomfortable. "We examined game day and wanted to contemporise and make the focus football. "We felt we didn't need cheerleaders and would like them replaced by a group of drummers, male and female. "We've talked to a lot of people and everyone sees it as being progressive. "The whole idea of percussion will be exciting for the crowd."

Crowe said his club's game day producer Dein Perry had canvassed the opinions of fans before making the decision to sack the cheer-squad. Asked if other clubs could follow Souths initiative, Crowe said: "When they see how exciting this is, there will be a big call for it. "We found it hard to work out a positive about it. There was a grey area to it. "It makes women uncomfortable and it makes blokes who take their son to the football also uncomfortable. "But we are thankful for the time and effort the girls put in and some of them probably will be disappointed."

Crowe's stance was supported by Spencer, who liked the idea of men and women performing together in the drum band. "She likes the fact that game day entertainment will be multi-sex. She likes that aspect," Crowe said. "The positive response we've got particularly from women like my wife when they heard this was happening makes it a little easier for them to go to the game and simply enjoy the actual sport.

But two of Souths cheerleaders yesterday said they were disappointed not to be dancing this year. "We were employed by Souths as professional dancers and our role as cheerleaders was simply to add glamour to the image of the NRL in terms of marketing," Ashleigh Francis said. "Children at the games were constantly approaching us and asking us for autographs and photos and little girls would even ask us if they were old enough to be cheergirls too." Another Souths cheerleader, who did not want to be named, said: "How would we make people feel uncomfortable? The aim is for us just to enjoy ourselves and entertain the fans with the sport."

Source