From the occasionally used cortex department:
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on Friday at a campaign event that the United States’ blueprint for beating global warming needs to be the same as the blueprint the U.S. used for defeating Nazi Germany in the 1940s.
“So we talk about existential threats, the last time we had a really major existential threat to this country was around World War II,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And so we’ve been here before and we have a blueprint of doing this before.”
“None of these things are new ideas,” Ocasio-Cortez continued. “What we had was an existential threat in the context of a war. We had a direct existential threat with another nation, this time it was Nazi Germany, and axis, who explicitly made the United States as an enemy, as an enemy.”
“And what we did was that we chose to mobilize our entire economy and industrialized our entire economy and we put hundreds of thousands if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country,” she stated. “We have to do the same thing in order to get us to 100% renewable energy, and that’s just the truth of it.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ve hev vays to make you not varm.
So she doesn’t know science, nor does she know history. What does she know?
“…the last time we had a really major existential threat to this country was around World War II…”
The Cold War must have been eliminated from her educational curriculum. How clueless is she?
In the immortal lyrics of the late, great Sam Cooke (died aged 33; RIP):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_MkCV_MkgE
Decades of songs died with him in the Hacienda Motel on South Figueroa in December 1964.
“So I got me a pencil and a moleskin book
when I heard Bertha Franklin shot and killed Sam Cooke
wrote down December 11, 1964
ain’t gonna be twisting the night away no more
it took 15 minutes for the jury to decide
cause of death’s justified homicide
Liza Boyer wasn’t called by the prosecution
later on she’s arrested for prostitution
La hacienda motel had a busted down door
Sam’s wallet and his money was never accounted for”
Ray Wylie Hubbard – Count My Blessings
Great song:
The reality is that based upon the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we have been experiencing has been caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. The Earth’s climate has been changing for eons and mankind does not have the power to stop it. So carpet bombing cities and invading Western Europe will have no effect upon how Mother Nature is gradually changing the Earth’s climate. Mankind has not had the power to change a single weather event let alone change global climate.
Ocasio-Cortez has fallen into the trap taught in most liberal arts colleges today. They teach that if you say something is true, then it will be true.
ie: those that were born white are racist
If you want to be a different sex (your choice of a dozen options) they you will be simply by saying so
If you are white, you can choose to be black – aka Rachel Dolezal [and vice versa – Michael Jackson] but be careful about claiming indian ancestry!
If you say CO2 causes global warming, then it does.
If Climate Change can be defeated by using the same things we used in WWII then if you say so it will work.
If the news media decided OJ Simpson was guilty of murder then it didn’t matter what the jury found.
If a woman decides she was assaulted then the fundamental principal ‘innocent until proven guilty’ doesn’t matter.
Someday, somehow Ocasio-Cortez might grow up, but maybe not.
Ocasio-Cortez has fallen into the trap taught in most liberal arts colleges today. They teach that if you say something is true, then it will be true.
ie: those that were born white are racist
If you want to be a different sex (your choice of a dozen options) then you will be simply by saying so
If you are white, you can choose to be black – aka Rachel Dolezal [and vice versa – Michael Jackson] but be careful about claiming indian ancestry!
If you say CO2 causes global warming, then it does.
If Climate Change can be defeated by using the same things we used in WWII then if you say so it will work.
If the news media decided OJ Simpson was guilty of murder then it didn’t matter what the jury found.
If a woman decides she was assaulted then the fundamental principal ‘innocent until proven guilty’ doesn’t matter.
Someday, somehow Ocasio-Cortez might grow up, but maybe not.
According to “gender studies”, there are at least 63 “genders”, not quite as many as ice cream flavors, but close:
https://apath.org/63-genders/
And that’s from AD 2000. There must be a lot more genders by now.
So which is the proper pronoun to use when referring to such?
He, she, it or what?
Gunga,
We really don’t want to get into modern pronoun Nazism and neologism. It would sicken you.
So the answer is “what”?
The answer is to fight back, on campuses, in the streets, at the ballot box, if not yet on the beaches.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light which was the apparently sadly brief life of classical liberalism, of republican virtue, of civil society, of freedom of speech, of private property, of family, of faith, of liberty.
She/He/It said quickly as one word.
Here’s Catharine MacKinnon in her 1983 paper, “Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: Toward Feminist Jurisprudence.”
She says, “The feminist theory knowledge is inextricable from the feminist critique of power because the male point of view forces itself upon the world as its way of apprehending it. … Objectivity, as the epistemological stance of which objectification the social process, creates the reality it apprehends by defining as knowledge the reality it creates through its way of apprehending.”
Got that? Reality itself is a construct of the choice of perception. This idiocy is taught as canon throughout academic cultural studies, and is fervently believed by the student acolytes.
MacKinnon’s entire paper is nonsensical gibberish like that. And she is the top doggette of 3rd wave feminism and the doyen of revealed truth in cultural studies.
So, David Middleton, when your colleagues find oil, it’s there because they all first apprehended it to be there. And, of course, pace MacKinnon, petroleum wouldn’t burn if you didn’t impose your male hegemonic apprehension that it burns.
This is real, “The Stupid, it burns!“
‘help! i’m trapped in schrodinger’s box!’ – tinkerbelle, probably.
” … Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez … ”
—
Shouldn’t she have an education and some life of experience first before declaring herself a master-mind and all round global genius? Too much positive-reinforcement as a child?
She wants to fight global warming by having Bomber Command the USAAF bomb Germany into the stone age while the Soviet Army storms through Eastern Europe? Wouldn’t that create, I don’t know, a LOT of greenhouse gases? Particularly all the methane generated by fifty million decaying corpses?
(On the other hand, there’s something to be said about standing back and watching socialists butcher each other…)
“And what we did was that we chose to mobilize our entire economy and industrialized our entire economy and we put hundreds of thousands if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country,” she stated. “We have to do the same thing in order to get us to 100% renewable energy, and that’s just the truth of it.”
Does she realize what exactly she has said? The Left should throw her out on her ear – she advocates the ‘mobilization of an entire economy’ and ‘industrialization’.
I thought the Globull Warmers were all about ‘de-industrialization’? The renewable energy sources that she advocates for, can only exist as supplements to base load nuclear, hydro-electric, and other carbon dioxide intensive energy sources. As a lone source for energy for a nation, renewables would not be able to support any such ‘industrialization’. This human being knows not of what she speaks. But as others have said above, it appears she has scant capabilities as an orator. Could this shortcoming actually be a positive for her opposition in the coming mid-term election?
One can only hope….
Regards
MCR
This “child” has absolutely no idea of what she is suggesting.
‘mobilization of an entire economy’ and ‘industrialization’.
(Just close your eyes and wish REAL hard and the Rich and the Corporations will stop being selfish and solve the problem for us.)
We did not just “put people to work”
(And if I understand Alexandria, her idea is to put OTHER people to work.)
I don’t see current millennials sacrificing what our parents and grandparents did in WWII:
– separation of families for years
– many volunteering for service who were killed or wounded
– giving up what we today take for granted by rationing (meat, butter, gasoline etc) or just plain unavailable (automobiles)
– mothers volunteering to replace husbands in jobs in heavy industry.
God help us if many with this intellect end up in Congress.
I thought the Globull Warmers were all about ‘de-industrialization’?
No, only de industrialization of the US, maybe the West. Chinese and Indian industrialization is just fine. As is Russian.
She says the WWII experience gives us a “blueprint” on how to fight global warming. So let’s see, during WWII we had Nazi German and Imperial Japan, both of whom are nations that featured populations of people. So we attacked these nations with naval engagements and military invasions, defeating their armed forces with ours.
So, who do we attack to stop global warming? Where is this Evil Axis of Global Warmers? Where are their ships, where are their legions?
Hey! It’s YOU! You and your SUV and your warm lifestyle with enough to eat! Don’t you know there are children starving in -er -er -er – I’ll remember the place later!
“blueprint for beating global warming needs to be the same as the blueprint the U.S. used for defeating Nazi Germany in the 1940s.”
That would mean bombing major cities to atoms as this WW2 footage show
Chemtrails!
We need to send Ocasio-Cortez to the Eastern Front to fight that existential threat.
She would fit right in with Stalin’s Red Army.
I also find it curious she didn’t mention Japan and how we won that war by avoiding a direct invasion of Japan to bring about their unconditional surrender.
The Nazis (aka National Socialist Party) was an existential threat because, and, like all Socialist governments, was based upon the immoral philosophy tht government’s have the “right” to INITIATE force against individuals against their will.
CAGW is just another Socialist fantasy based on the immoral practice of the initiation of force, and, like NAZI Germany, must be defeated.
The idiotic CAGW sc@m wishes to steal $122 TRILLION (latest October 2018 IPCC projection) from taxpayers from around the world to “fix” an imaginary problem concocted by Socialists…
No thank you…
Yes, Socialism has always been, and always will be, an immoral existential threat to humanity, and it must be defeated by voting the Socialist bums out of office, and educating people about the true immoral nature and history of Socialism, which lead to the deaths of 100+ million citizens of Socialist regimes in the 20th century…
The only reason to put this in “Nazi” context is put those who are skeptical in the role of Nazi’s. The strategy is to make her opponents “Nazis.” Don’t even bother to intellectualize it by analyzing differences. It needs to be condemned and dismissed as the ad hominem attack that it is.
I’d say “Democratic Socialists” like her are a very significant existential threat to our Constitutional Republic.
She is actually correct. The war was won by nuclear power. So if you believe in human caused global warming then nuclear is the way to go.
Sorry, just finished watching Purdue knock off Ohio State (yeah!), it is late and I had a long day so I really didn’t comprehend she wasn’t referring to the war in the Pacific.
From this Buckeye fan’s perspective, the only good thing about it was Tyler got to see see his team upset the #2 team in the country.
(For those who don’t know, Tyler is a huge Purdue fan … in hospice. Terminal cancer. )
She should be locked up in an insane asylum.
Democrat side of the aisle in the US House of Representatives is close enough for government work.
So that she can drive the insane incurably crazy? Think of the poor wardens – and the innocent children!
So she believes the National Socialists in Germany were an existential threat but not the International Socialists of the Soviet Union with thousands of missiles with nuclear weapons pointed at the United States?
The Soviet Union invaded countries and waged proxy wars in order to defeat and destroy the United States. I’m sure, as a good Socialist, she in in favor of this.
The US is not leading the world in emission reductions. By some measures the US lead the world in emissions reductions in 2017.
Data for the US, the EU-28 and China are shown below. Climate changes depends only on the amount of CO2 emitted, but – in the real world – changes in emissions per capita and economic value (GDP) obtained from use of fossil fuels are important metrics. I didn’t find emissions/capital or emissions/GDP for 2017.
Idiotically, the starting year traditionally is 1990, when the US and the EU-28 were on very different tracks. Germany was already shutting down inefficient East German operations. Britain was switching from domestic coal to North Sea gas. Given the large number of years needed to change, 2000 is a more sensible starting year, given the time needed to respond to late 1990s international negotiations. The tradition is to sum the 1990 to 2000 and 2000 to present changes. US emissions peaked in 2005. China is typical of the path 4 billion people in the developing world are likely to follow.
The rate of recent changes in emissions/GDP are remarkably similar!
Total Emissions (billion tons CO2/yr):
1990: US, 4.95. EU, 4.34. China, 2.31.
2000: US, 5.73. EU, 4.08. China, 3.35. (US +15.8%, EU -6.0%, Ch +45% vs 1990)
2014: US, 5.36. EU, 3.45. China, 9.21. (US -6.5%, EU -15.4%, Ch +175% vs 2000)
2017: US, 5.09. EU, 3.54. China, 9.23. (US -11.2%, EU -13.2%, Ch +176% vs 2000)
Emissions per capita (tons CO2/person/year):
1990: US, 19.6. EU, 9.2. Ch, 2.1.
2000: US, 20.6. EU, 8.4. Ch, 2.9. (US +5.1%, EU -8.7%, Ch +38% vs 1990)
2014: US, 16.5. EU, 6.7. Ch, 7.6. (US -19.9%, EU -20.2%, Ch +162% vs 2000)
Emissions per $GDP (kg CO2/$1000 (US$(2010)):
1990: US, 544. EU, 367. Ch 1500.
2000: US, 455. EU, 278. Ch 800. (US -16.4%, EU -24.3%, Ch -47% vs 1990)
2014: US, 333. EU, 200. Ch 630. (US -26.8%, EU -28.1%, Ch -21% vs 2000)
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/jrc-2015-trends-in-global-co2-emissions-2015-report-98184.pdf
https://www.carbonbrief.org/bp-global-data-2017-shows-record-highs-coal-power-renewables
who cares?
Gnomish: The credibility of “the world most widely read climate website” is damaged by such false statements. Andy claims that the comments of readers will prevent the distribution of false information through WUWT. Do you care whether the information you read here is correct or not? Or do you simply want to hear things that agree with your current opinion?
Unfortunately, there wasn’t a simple way to describe which country is leading the world in emissions reduction.
I believe she intends to wage war on the CO2 emitting industry the radical left is blaming for climate change.
Watch Miss “Eloquence” herself on J. Kimmel from earlier this week . . . yeah . . . you know . . . for sure:
https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2018/10/18/jimmy-kimmels-fawn-fest-with-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-was-um-like-you-know-totally-crazy-video/
Speaker of the House someday.
Following it the footsteps of Speaker Pelosi.
“Democracy, like religion, is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual stupidity.”
The election of dangerously stupid people is an unfortunate consequence of the democratic process.
Candidates for election to public office should be screened to exclude those that do not possess a modicum of common sense!
As Margaret Thatcher may have once almost said: “the trouble with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of convenient places to put the concentration camps”. Given that Nazis were socialists, and outcomes under non-Nazi socialism are indistinguishable from outcomes under Nazi-socialism (and, we may now safely say after Venezuela, Democratic Socialism), how is she under the impression that she has any moral right to judge others for their positions on climate change? As many from Clemenceau to Churchill have also almost said “if you are a socialist when you are young, you may be a sociopath; if you are still a socialist when you are older, it removes all doubt”. What her comments show is that climate science is not about science, it is about politics and ideology. But we’ve all known that since DC air conditioner-gate in 1988.
Congrats, Comrade! Victory was won because of fossil fuel, namely oil. Coal was the backbone of industrial production at home.
And once the Allies figured that one out (in spring 1944) and concentrated bombing on German oil installations the Luftwaffe and german Panzers were quickly immobilized.
One side had plentiful and with these resources managed to shorten the supplies of the opponent. Result:
Those who make good use of fossil fuels win.
BTW: how many batteries on how many trailers would it take to move a M1 Abrams across a desolate desert and how many wind turbines will have to be set up to recharge?
It not the M1 Abrams but the M1 Tesla, of course.
It can be done … just ask Elon … he’ll tell you so.
Panic is setting among the catastrophicorriers, they are too late, the Arctic ice melt has turned the corner from its past decades minima.
She is not too hot on history is she?
“we put hundreds of thousands if not millions of people to work in defending our shores and defending this country”
The Army Air Force alone numbered well over two millions by 1943 and had 170,000 personnel just on the Marianas by V-J day.
By the way “Democratic Socialist” is rather similar to boiling ice. You can say it but it doesn’t exist.
Want the same blueprint the U.S. used for defeating Nazi Germany in the 1940s?
It cost the US nearly 36% of GDP in 1945, or $4.1 trillion.