Guest post by Alec Rawls
Richard “bonehead” Glover, radio talker and 20 year columnist for the Sydney Morning Herald, dares to be outrageously conventional:
Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.
There is no actual scientific debate you see. There are just left-wingers and right-wingers following their different natures. “People on the left instinctively believe in communal action,” says Glover, so they were instinctively receptive when the science showed communal action to be necessary.
Conservatives in contrast are by nature selfish, or “bloody minded” as Glover puts it (alluding, one presumes, to Tennyson’s “nature red in tooth and claw”). Consequently, conservatives instinctively disbelieve any scientific analysis that demands anything of them.
Glover means no offense of course. Conservatives can’t help their amoral natures. But what if they had no way to escape recrimination from the grandchildren whose interests they refuse to account? That’s the ticket. Brand ’em with their denial of science. Unable to escape accountability, they will be forced to consider the consequences of their actions.
Don’t you lesser beings get it? Glover’s not just a semi-sincere Nazi wanna-be: he’s a brilliant social scientist! By this simple mechanism, the bloody-mindedness of those nasty conservatives could be overcome!
Just one problem with Glover’s theory. Us “deniers” have been tattooing our names all over the internet for years, and funny thing, we want the next generation to know how we have been fighting for them:
“Deniers” care about their children?
“But how can this be?” The Grinch pondered and scratched. “If they cared for their tots, wouldn’t they act just like me, and put all their faith in the IPCC?”
Glover’s brain, say the Aussies, grew three sizes that day. “Crikey,” it dawned, “they must mean what they say!”
They’ve looked at the science. They know it’s a crock. That carbon was framed, and energy is the rock.
The moral of the story?
A tattooed blunder, in pixels or ink, will often be a curse. Take it far enough to impoverish the world, and I’ve got just one more verse:
New York Representative Anthony Weiner insists that opposition to CO2 cap-and-trade supports terrorism by sending more money to terror-supporting oil states. At the same time, he has voted down-the-line against the development of domestic fossil resources. Truly the lowest of the low, so I tattooed him. Forcibly.
See Mr. Glover? I’m not completely unsympathetic.
Will Glover have me on his radio show? I’m sending him a request. As you might guess, his analysis is completely fact-free. Does he even know that there is a solar theory of 20th century warming, or the implications for climate if this theory is correct, now that the sun has dropped into a quiet cycle? I’d like to put him some information, and he sounds game enough. We’ll see.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ann Coulter’s new book Demonic is an excellent expose` of the Left, of which Richard Glover is a sordid part :
The demon is a mob, and the mob is demonic. The Democratic Party activates mobs, depends on mobs, coddles mobs, publicizes and celebrates mobs—it is the mob. Sweeping in its scope and relentless in its argument, Demonic explains the peculiarities of liberals as standard groupthink behavior. To understand mobs is to understand liberals.
In her most provocative book to date, Ann Coulter argues that liberals exhibit all the psychological characteristics of a mob, for instance:
Liberal Groupthink: “The same mob mentality that leads otherwise law-abiding people to hurl rocks at cops also leads otherwise intelligent people to refuse to believe anything they haven’t heard on NPR.”
Liberal Schemes: “No matter how mad the plan is—Fraternité, the ‘New Soviet Man,’ the Master Race, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, Building a New Society, ObamaCare—a mob will believe it.”
Liberal Enemies: “Instead of ‘counterrevolutionaries,’ liberals’ opponents are called ‘haters,’ ‘those who seek to divide us,’ ‘tea baggers,’ and ‘right-wing hate groups.’ Meanwhile, conservatives call liberals ‘liberals’—and that makes them testy.”
Liberal Justice: “In the world of the liberal, as in t
he world of Robespierre, there are no crimes, only criminals.”
Liberal Violence: “If Charles Manson’s followers hadn’t killed Roman Polanski’s wife, Sharon Tate, Clinton would have pardoned him, too, and he’d probably be teaching at Northwestern University.”
Citing the father of mob psychology, Gustave Le Bon, Coulter catalogs the Left’s mob behaviors: the creation of messiahs, the fear of scientific innovation, the mythmaking, the preference for images over words, the lack of morals, and the casual embrace of contradictory ideas.
Coulter traces the history of the liberal mob to the French Revolution and Robespierre’s revolutionaries (delineating a clear distinction from America’s founding fathers), who simply proclaimed that they were exercising the “general will” before slaughtering their fellow citizens “for the good of mankind.”
Similarly, as Coulter demonstrates, liberal mobs, from student radicals to white-trash racists to anti-war and pro-ObamaCare fanatics today, have consistently used violence to implement their idea of the “general will.”
This is not the American tradition; it is the tradition of Stalin, of Hitler, of the guillotine—and the tradition of the American Left.
As the heirs of the French Revolution, Democrats have a history that consists of pandering to mobs, time and again, while Republicans, heirs to the American Revolution, have regularly stood for peaceable order.
Hoping to muddy this horrifying truth, liberals slanderously accuse conservatives of their own crimes—assassination plots, conspiracy theorizing, political violence, embrace of the Ku Klux Klan. Coulter shows that the truth is the opposite: Political violence—mob violence—is always a Democratic affair.
Surveying two centuries of mob movements, Coulter demonstrates that the mob is always destructive. And yet, she argues, beginning with the civil rights movement in the sixties, Americans have lost their natural, inherited aversion to mobs. Indeed, most Americans have no idea what they are even dealing with.
Only by recognizing the mobs and their demonic nature can America begin to defend itself.
This is one of those “agreed-on lies” that fuel our modern world even more than petroleum.
Both sides agree that AGW belief correlates with communal or socialist or statist ideas. They use different words to express the idea, and they disagree on whether this is a good thing, but they agree on the false “fact”.
The TRUE FACT is that AGW belief belongs to Wall Street, and governments go along with it to obey Wall Street.
Simple proof in this year’s political zoo: Mitt Romney. In the usual terms of the Left, Romney is a “right-winger”, but he’s above all else a Wall Streeter. As such his social and political interests require him to firmly support the Carbon Cult along with all the other elements of the Modern Apocalypse. (Diversity, Free Trade, Biodiversity, etc.)
It’s very unfortunate how they’ve got AGW skeptics labelled as “right wing”. How did this happen?
I’m not right wing – I want the next generation to have JOBS -not DEBT to the financial-political-media elite.
He’s living in the past. We don’t need to tatoo people, just look it up on the WWW.
We used to have an unpopular manager who was nicknamed “The Count with the silent ‘o'”. That’s about as far as my bad-mouthing goes, short of lapsing into episodes of Monty Pyton burned into my brain.
It’s ok. The man has a right to his opinion… even if his opinion is that only he and those that agree with him have a right to an opinion.
I have never thought of my homeland as a haven for lunatics but we certainly have our share and they all seem to be coming out of the woodworks at the same time. It makes me feel ashamed. That camel story was actually carried by one of the major Australian papers as a genuine way to earn carbon credits. Apparently, murder for profit is the latest green mantra. And yes, Zorro, you do have to wonder how far down the list we are. After all, we breathe too!
The link between Nazism/Fascism and Paganism is remarkably strong. Deny Gaia or the sky god CO2 and you will have your evil ways burned into your skin, no doubt at a communal sunrise meeting culminating in an orgy. It must be quite exhilarating to be a self-appointed Pagan Priest, especially in the halls of academe.
Wow! That sure took the veil off my eyes. Last time a rant of Mr. Glover’s was posted, it was so over the top that I was dead sure it was nothing but quirky humor. People told me I was wrong. Turns out, they were right. Same thing with that silly “I’m a climate scientist” rap video. Surely had to be self-deprecating irony. Because NO adult could be that lame for real and then actually post a video of it publicly……Well, let me admit that I need to recalibrate my sarcasm/irony/dry humor detectors because they are getting false positives!!!
As for this non-sense about tattooing people with their beliefs (and dis-beliefs), I just hope that this guy is an outlier. Fanatics are not healthy for themselves and those they influence, and I just thank the Good Lord that I live in a democracy where someone of that ill-will and anger marginalize themselves through their free speech. It also makes me feel so sorry for those born into societies that are not built to cope constructively with differences. Anyone with such revulsion in them for someone who is different than them is someone that I can not understand.
Yes fine, provided all those on the other side of the debate get their “beliefs” tattooed on their bodies too. And then when our grandchildren grow up, they get to flog whoever was wrong. That about fits the tone of the article, no?
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
June 9, 2011 at 2:59 am
“Now Leif Svalgaard will drop by with his tattooing needles to permanently chastise such ignorance. “It’s NOT the Sun, stupid!” on Alec’s forearm should be a sufficient rebuke.”
It is my impression that Dr S only insists that changes in TSI are too small to be shown as climate drivers and that any other proposal about the Sun lacks proven mechanisms for the claimed influences on our climate. I would be highly disappointed if, after any of those proposals met his requirements of proof, he would not gladly acknowledge them.
@Scottish Sceptic. To add to Grumpy Old Man UK, a further irony is that it’s the English economy which has just bailed out two big Scottish banks.
Jim Hogg says: “From a reading of the gospels you’d expect Christians and socialists to be quite similar in their political position, yet the right wing of US politics has a very strong Christian component, many of whose members condemn any kind of communal action as socialist or “liberal”!”
This statement strikes me as similar to the misunderstanding the author of the article is talking about. Communal action is NOT centralization of power in the government. Nor is “charity” the War on Poverty. There is no point in scripture where Jesus or any of the writers say “Rome isn’t nearly powerful enough to accomplish good stuff. So we need to cede much more power to Rome and have them take a lot more from us in taxes using the threat of sending soldiers with shields and swords, Then the wise people who run Rome will be able to do good things with that money and power.” That is what Jesus might have said were he a socialist. Or he might have said: “I will lead you to war against Rome. We will set up our own powerful government that will take lots of money and do wise stuff with it.” That was the zealot’s vision of the Messiah’s role. Jesus refused it and went to the cross alone.
The charity and communal action Jesus and the early Christians speak about is private charity and voluntary community action based out of the church. And in fact, the numbers are quite clear that the right wing Christians you refer to today engage, far more than other groups, in private charity and voluntary community action, including that action based out of the church. The private charity is on top of the taxes paid to “Rome.”
So the dividing line is not between those who believe in communal action and charity (good left wingers) and those who do not (bad right wing Christians). It is between those who believe in the centralization of power to coerce communal action and charity and those who believe such centralization of power is, of itself, a bad thing.
Replace “charity” with “stewardship over the environment” and you have the basic concept of the article.
I’ve come up with an unambiguous, striking, and clever tattoo (or T-shirt, button, or coffee cup) for us scorcher-scam scoffers:
A pair of upraised, chain-shackled hands decisively snapping a hockey stick (with its blade upturned at the right).
It is based on the well-known (to many warmists) logo of the War Resisters League, in which the upraised hands are snapping a rifle.
A large, easily readable caption around the perimeter of the button would read, “Gore Resisters’ League.”
In response to an earlier version of my suggestion that I posted on WUWT (which had a weaker slogan, a too-small typeface, and lacked the chain), a kindly blogger named S. Weasel created an image that came close to my vision, here: http://sweasel.com/archives/6403 (then hit page-down twice). I made a couple of comments on that thread about the design..
I hope someone here will enhance his version in the way I’ve advocated—then I might take it to a tattoo artist and “get it on.” (He’d blow it up on a copier and use it as a tattoo-template.)
kzb says:
June 9, 2011 at 4:50 am
It’s very unfortunate how they’ve got AGW skeptics labelled as “right wing”. How did this happen?
I’m not right wing – I want the next generation to have JOBS -not DEBT to the financial-political-media elite.
===================================================================================
Today, that makes you a right-wing [nut], teabagging, anti-science, loon, and more likely, because of your extreme statements, also a God believing racist!
I wish I could tell you that was a joke, but it isn’t.
The global warming cult is on the verge of becoming violent if you ask me. I can see them forming terrorist groups and assassinating so-called deniers. The more REAL science destroys their religious beliefs, the more unhinged they become. Environmentalism has become a political movement, it has nothing to so with facts or logic or science any longer, if it ever did.. It’s all about a group of fanatics imposing their will upon everyone else, by any means possible.
I’m proud to be a denier !
I find Glover’s invocation of soviet-aligned communism sympathies among the left most apposite to the current situation.
I am not sure that the horrors of Soviet totalitarianism “were obvious to anyone who cared to look from at least the early 1930s” — when touring UK intellectuals were famously fooled. But they certainly were after 1956, although not only due to Hungary, as Glover suggests, but also due to other reports of the purges, and Khrushchev’s stunning “Cult of Personality” speech. And it might be true, as Glover states, that for most of the left, that blindness ended, dramatically at this time. But not for all. Not among the intelligentsia at least.
The communist party of France, that nearly won power in the late 60s, with strongest support among academics and intellectuals, was soviet aligned. In fact, in the 1960s and 1970s many social science academics in France, the UK and Australian were members or supporters of soviet-aligned communism. So what has happened to them? Did they ever confess their error in sympathizing with such horror? Has the ‘tattoo’ of this sympathy been bad for their careers?
Casual observation says no. And many like Terry Eagleton and Stuart MacIntyre have moved on to successful careers in the academic establishment. They rode one wave of an academic trend, to the next wave (the new left), and then beyond to land them in a position for advancement up the line. And I suspect that this is what will happen with Climate Change scientists.
Casualties like Phil Jones will be an exception. Most of the rest will be able to leverage into a new stage of their career. Why is this important? It is not that they miss the recrimination that is their just desert. Leaving any consideration of guilt and retribution aside, what is important is that it looks like the risk of joining the Climate Change bandwagon is low while the advantages are monumentally obvious. What the error of left wing sympathy towards totalitarianism suggests is that there is little incentive to hold back against the momentum of sort of corruption within state-instituted science.
If the left is successful in inciting riots and civil unrest……
….it gives them an excuse to tighten down on everyone more
Pass more laws “for the good and protection”……………
That’s the way communism works………………….
I would wear the tattoo of my AGW-denier number on my wrist with pride.
Richard
jim hogg says:
June 9, 2011 at 12:45 am
“From a reading of the gospels you’d expect Christians and socialists to be quite similar in their political position, yet the right wing of US politics has a very strong Christian component, many of whose members condemn any kind of communal action as socialist or “liberal”! ”
The gospels have nothing to do with the right or left positions rather it has to do with where we are relative to God’s position. The gospels are not political at all and to read politics into the gospels is to miss the point.
For one to read the gospels and change their political position on something is a different matter all together. The right wing has a strong Christian component for a good reason. The reason “why” is what you don’t understand. Try not just looking at a reading but read the gospels as a whole and you just might understand.
The greatest gift to the free world from the land of Oz is for them to cripple their economy by pursuing the goal to prevent a tiny, almost unmeasurable amount of CO2 from entering the atmosphere. It will give our hand wringing socialists something to weep over and presents to them another 3rd world government to shuttle under their benevolent group-think wings, and our manufacturing, not strapped with this impossible dream, will provide for them the mechanical essentials needed for comfortable living. Paid for by US tax payers, of course.
For this to happen on our end it does mean, of course, that Obama has to go in 2012, or we’ll be in the same punt as Oz, storm tossed, heading for the shoals of failure, as benevolent leftists from China arrive to shuttle us all under their wings.
James Sexton says: & kzb says: June 9, 2011 at 4:50 am
It’s very unfortunate how they’ve got AGW skeptics labelled as “right wing”.
I’ve often thought that “right” and “left” become pretty meaningless at the extremes. What I mean, is that if you go far enough to the “left”, you often become indistinguishable those on the right going the other way. Basically, it seems to me that when take to extreme politics is more of a circle, whereby at the far distance from “common sense” lies a region of “total national-social eco-fascist nonsense: the extreme use of force and mass coercion to create a world where we are all equally repressed by the machinery of the state. (except the few elite who run it all)
“The left versus right argument is pointless hot air. “
I do not believe this.
Another theory is that the political spectrum is not a straight line, it’s a circle. This means that as a persons political belief goes far enough to the left it comes out on the right.
I have heard from reliable sources that in 1940 when Nazi troops marched into Paris they were cheered on by the communists.
I’m not so opposed to the idea. I look forward to being proven right.
jim hogg says:
June 9, 2011 at 12:45 am
. From a reading of the gospels you’d expect Christians and socialists to be quite similar in their political position
=====================================================================================
Jim, I can’t think of any two things that could be more different.
Christians have faith in God…..
Socialists have faith in government
Christians believe that God runs the show…
.and socialists believe certain men run the show