Steve Keen, Head of the School of Economics, History and Politics at Kingston University in London. By MeJudice - link, CC BY 3.0, link

CNBC: “War-Level Footing” Needed to Solve Climate Change

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Steve Keen, a Fellow at University College London, believes fellow economists are biased towards believing “capitalism can handle anything”, and that a “war footing” is required to correct the “total misrepresentations” of economists.

‘War’ footing needed to correct economists’ miscalculations on climate change, says professor

Karen Gilchrist

Mainstream economists “deliberately and completely” ignored scientific data and instead “made up their own numbers” to suit their market models, Steve Keen, a fellow at University College London’s Institute for Strategy, Resilience and Security, told CNBC on Friday.

Now, a “war-level footing” is required to have any hope of repairing the damage, he said.

“Fundamentally, the economists have totally misrepresented the science and ignored it where it contradicts their bias that climate change is not a big deal because, in their opinion, capitalism can handle anything,” Keen told “Street Signs Asia.”

Keen said the repercussions of climate change were foretold in the 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth” — a divisive report on the destructive consequences of global expansion — but economists then and since failed to heed its warnings, preferring instead to rely on market mechanisms.

“If their warnings had been taken seriously and we’d done as they’d suggested, changing our trajectory from 1975 on, we could have done it gradually using things like carbon tax and so on,” he said. “Because economists have delayed it by another half century, we are, as a species, putting three to four times the pressure on the biosphere.”

Read more:

Part of the problem of course is academics like Steve Keen are way too timid when describing their position. “The Limits to Growth” strongly suggested population growth and economic growth are linked. I’m sure we would all have loved to hear more about Professor Steve Keen’s plans for limiting global population. Sadly Steve doesn’t appear to have explained any of this to CNBC, or perhaps CNBC decided not to publish that part of the interview.

Of course, “The Limits to Growth” is not without critics. Peter Passell, Marc Roberts and Leonard Ross’ 1972 response probably single handedly popularised the phrase “Garbage In, Garbage Out“.

The book is “The Limits to Growth,” and its message is simple: Either civilization or growth must end, and soon. Continued population and industrial growth will exhaust the world’s minerals and bathe the biosphere in fatal levels of pollution. As the authors summarize, “if the present growth trends.. continue unchanged, the limits of growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next hundred years.”

“The Limits to Growth” is a product of an interdisciplinary M.I.T. team led by Dennis Meadows. It is financed and publicized as part of the “Project on the Predicament of Mankind,” an activity of the Club of Rome. The Club of Rome is a four‐year‐old international organization of 75 technocrats and businessmen selfdescribed as an “invisible college” dedicated to probing “the complex of problems troubling men of all nations,” including poverty, degradation of the environment, alienation of youth, rejection of traditional values, and monetary disruptions. These “seemingly divergent” problems are, says the Club, in reality part of a single “world problematique,” which can now be analyzed with the help of computers. Using techniques developed by M.I.T. systems‐engineer Jay Forrester, the Meadows team claims to have limned the underlying fallacy of industrial expansion.

“The Limits to Growth,” in our view, is an empty and misleading work. Its imposing apparatus of computer technology and systems jargon conceals a kind of intellectual Rube Goldberg device—one which takes arbitrary assumptions, shakes them up and comes out with arbitrary conclusions that have the ring of science. “Limits” pretends to a degree of certainty so exaggerated as to obscure the few modest (and unoriginal) insights that it genuinely contains. Less than pseudoscience and little more than polemical fiction, “The Limits to Growth” is best summarized not as a rediscovery of the laws of nature but as a rediscovery of the oldest maxim of computer science: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Read more:

The Limits to Growth” advocate Steve Keen seems like a fascinating character. According to Wikipedia he applied for voluntary redundancy in 2013, after The University of West Sydney shut down their economics programme. Since then he appears to have found his spiritual home with far left post Keynesians in London, where he is now Head of the School of Economics, History and Politics at Kingston University. No doubt Steve wields significant influence over the course material studied by students entrusted to his care.

Steve Keen appears to have quite a following on Patreon, a platform for giving money to people. He wrote a very long essay about how wonderful it is people give him money, thanking people who support his efforts to overturn blind faith in Capitalism.

5 11 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 24, 2021 10:33 pm

What will exhaust the World’s minerals and bathe the biosphere in fatal levels of pollution is not excessive population growth but the insane drive by Climate Alarmists to cover the Earth in Wind-Turbines and Solar Panels and fill the roads with electric vehicles. The demand for rare minerals and metals to supply the Alarmists’ dream is already having severe evident consequences for people..

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
May 25, 2021 12:19 am

A miner’s dream. They will rule the world as they dig up the Earth.

3 tonne of copper for every wind turbine. That’s a lot of copper. Then at least tripling of the the transmission infrastructure because they operate at 30% of rated capacity. Then a lot more to cover for low wind plus humungous batteries that don’t come cheap. Then a tripling of the tripling to cover fossil fuel elimination in transport and industry.

Money. money, money – good time to be a miner! The prospects makes the dizzy days before the GFC look ordinary. The new surge will go to the moon:

Ron Long
Reply to  RickWill
May 25, 2021 3:08 am

“3 tonne of copper for every turbine.” That might explain the price of copper doubling in the last 12 months. As a mining exploration geologist I now find myself conflicted by all this nonsense versus opportunity.

Reply to  RickWill
May 25, 2021 6:47 am

Wouldn’t it be insane if the “need” for renewable energy forced us into meterorite mining to meet the demand for metals?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Spetzer86
May 25, 2021 9:42 am

I haven’t heard of any asteroids rich in copper, let alone meteorites landing on Earth.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  RickWill
May 25, 2021 9:37 am

And don’t forget the EVs. A typical EV requires 6 times the mineral inputs of a conventional car according to the IEA and with a projected 2 billion cars worldwide by 2050 that’s an awful lot of minerals required to meet net zero.

Kelvin Duncan
Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
May 25, 2021 1:41 am

But wait there’s more! The planting of vast areas of uncared-for forests on what was productive agricultural land is having a serious effect on food prices. And the forests will be a magnet for destructive diseases and pests. All in an effort to offset harmless CO2 emissions. And we have to pay for this nonsense. It’s a drag on productivity.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Kelvin Duncan
May 25, 2021 11:53 am

Oh no worries – they’ll cut them all down to put up wind turbines and solar panels, which will kill off lots of birds, bats and will increase the “pests” even further. Of course these “energy” installations will get a pass on that whole “deforestation” thing. Along with the whole “killing lots of birds that constitute endangered species” thing.

Richard (the cynical one)
May 24, 2021 10:48 pm

“War level footing” sounds a lot like suspension of freedoms, aka ‘martial law’. I can see how attractive that would be to those who favour a controlled economy, a curtailment of free speech, the right of unlimited search and seizure, the state control over every aspect of life.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 24, 2021 11:05 pm

It will no doubt be a Worker’s Paradise.

Of course in a Worker’s Paradise YOU will still be just a Worker.

THEY will be in administration type positions (cause only they know what is best and how to implement it) but someone (ie YOU) will still need to do the work.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
May 24, 2021 11:24 pm

The correct postulation is “lived experience.”

Richard Page
Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 25, 2021 3:28 am

“War level footing” is a rather pathetic and short sighted appeal to emotion – akin to a temper tantrum or cries for attention from a toddler.
If this person was seriously considering putting countries on such a footing then his job and that of every student and academic over 16 would be ended. They, along with most of the working population, would be toiling in manual jobs either in food, energy or mechanical production for little more than minimum wage.
He’s an idiot and has no clear idea what he is talking about or he would have shut up a long time ago. I can only assume that his belief is that this “War level footing” would be happening to other people, not him.

Reply to  Richard Page
May 25, 2021 8:12 am

Like most socialists, he’s convinced that he will be one of those who manage socialism. The rest of you are the ones who will have to give up everything you have in order to become the worker drones you were meant to be.

Last edited 26 days ago by MarkW
Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 25, 2021 6:31 am

I don’t even think that they’re hiding it anymore. Of course you have to restrict freedom if humanity is threatened!

Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 25, 2021 6:49 am

Maybe this could be one of those non-euphemistic “war level footings” where the other side starts sending things back the other way.

Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 25, 2021 8:10 am

Wasn’t it just yesterday when one of the usual suspects castigated all of us for tying climate alarmism with a desire for more socialism/communism.

Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
May 25, 2021 10:09 am

They’ve already said as much: “covid-style lockdowns” to “save the environment”

May 24, 2021 10:54 pm

Keen said the repercussions of climate change were foretold in the 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth” 

Well I never did read that publication but I sure heard enough about it. Strangely I can’t recall ever hearing any mention of “climate change”.

Besides, they called it global cooling back then.

Last edited 26 days ago by Art
Gerard Flood
Reply to  Art
May 24, 2021 11:30 pm

Re Keen’s reference to the long-debunked 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth” : Just because his milieu is in love with deceit or is extremely stupid, does not mean that the ‘real world’ will permit his ‘errors’ any credence.

Reply to  Gerard Flood
May 25, 2021 8:14 am

History has refuted just about every claim made in “The Limits to Growth”. Much like Ehrlich’s “Population Bomb”.

But then, being proven wrong by history never bothered socialists. If it did, they wouldn’t be socialists in the first place.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Gerard Flood
May 25, 2021 9:47 am

Speaking of credence, why should anyone believe an economist (One who practices the “dismal science.”) who claims to understand what are essentially issues of physical science? He is out of his element and doesn’t realize it.

Reply to  Art
May 25, 2021 6:15 am

I did examine the 1972 publication, and the Club of Rome output before that. It took no genius to identify the basic error involved: “If current trends continue unabated…” But, of course, they never do!

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  hiskorr
May 25, 2021 6:53 am

Exactly! The Club of Rome “experts” identified early-on exponentially-increasing trends in various developing fields (e.g., oil consumption vs production) and just extrapolated this out hundreds of years into the future. Like naive students, they never stopped to consider that an S-curve, commonly found in nature and that first appears as an exponential increase, is much more likely to reflect reality. Nor did they consider how new scientific discoveries, inventions and technology can be overwhelmingly disruptive to established trends in any field (e.g., agriculture, medicine, fossil fuel extraction, fossil fuel use, etc., etc).

Last edited 26 days ago by Gordon A. Dressler
AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 25, 2021 12:59 pm

For one, they probably assumed every car put on the road in the future would get the gas mileage of 1972 vehicles!

May 24, 2021 11:03 pm

An economist can’t even predict the economy 3 years ahead….why on Earth would they believe a climatist can predict the climate in 2100 ? Much less advocate going on a war footing ?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  DMacKenzie,
May 24, 2021 11:25 pm

Alice laughed: “There’s no use trying,” she said; “one can’t believe impossible things.” “I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

Charles Dodgson already thought about that ….

Gerard Flood
May 24, 2021 11:24 pm

From his perspective, “war” is his preferred ‘modus operandi’, because [1] he has no problem with error, deception and lies, and [2] “The first casualty when war comes is truth is his rationale and ally. However, mankind will never solve our problems – and will not stop inventing bogus problems – unless very many people of ‘good will’ * soberly, conscientiously and prudently collect, analyse, test, confer, discuss, formulate, experiment etc in a shared mission to protect, nurture and improve our common estate. PS. re: * all people of ‘good will’: not so long ago, I could have said ‘Civil Society’ rather than “all people of ‘good will’ “, but with the wholesale corrupting of the proper objectives and purposes of so many vital institutions – including the Judicial Branch of Government – the reform of Civil Society becomes everyone’s responsibility.

May 24, 2021 11:31 pm

Meanwhile their war on coal is hotting up with State mandated dumping by wind and solar leaving coal fired power stations running on sticky tape and string to eke the last revenue out of them-
Queensland hit by widespread power outage after fire and explosion at Callide power station (
Callide Power Station – CS Energy
Lest we forget-
Workers offered counselling after Liddell power station explosion – ABC News

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  observa
May 25, 2021 7:28 am

No coal means no metallurgical-grade silicon—which means no integrated circuits, no photovoltaics, no Green New Raw Deal.

Matthew Sykes
May 24, 2021 11:35 pm

Keen said the repercussions of climate change were foretold in the 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth””

Which has been proved to be a work of pure fantasy over time, along with The Population Bomb etc.

Vincent Causey
May 24, 2021 11:51 pm

I’m surprised to hear Steve Keen spout such nonsense. In interviews he’s done with Max Kaiser he seemed to be somebody with some original thoughts. He has been very critical of QE for example. I will scratch him off my list of people worth listening to.

May 24, 2021 11:55 pm

The phrase “war footing” means suspension of liberty and democratic principles. Typically these mandates are invoked when activists run out of rational arguments. Conversely the use of these phrases is the evidence that they have run out of rational arguments.

Reply to  Chaamjamal
May 25, 2021 4:33 am

Climate Scientists probably need to be careful with war footings it a bit like going past grassy knolls you need to make sure your opponent is going to play by the rules.

Last edited 26 days ago by LdB
Reply to  Chaamjamal
May 25, 2021 6:32 am

The brown shirts are waiting to make a move.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Chaamjamal
May 25, 2021 6:53 pm

So very well said!

Zig Zag Wanderer
May 24, 2021 11:59 pm

Keen said the repercussions of climate change were foretold in the 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth” — a divisive report on the destructive consequences of global expansion — but economists then and since failed to heed its warnings, preferring instead to rely on market mechanisms.

So they were completely correct? The Limits to Growth was wrong in almost every possible way, so ignoring it was sensible.

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
May 25, 2021 4:44 am

Don’t forget the famous Paul Ehrlich/Julian Simon wager. Ehrlich lost utterly.

Reply to  Graemethecat
May 25, 2021 9:35 am

But, as a leftist, he claims he was even more right than he thought when he wrote his Population Bomb book in the 60s.

Leftists cannot allow history t interfere with their goals. And the MSM never holds @sshats like him accountable for their foolishness.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Graemethecat
May 25, 2021 9:56 am
May 25, 2021 12:07 am

The guy cannot see past his nose. He derided classics economists as Ptolemists, stuck with their beliefs and halve truths on economics in the face of actual evidence that showed their beliefs wrong. Now he suddenly thinks climate scientists have is spot on and has joined their church and belief system despite all the evidence that shows they and their models are worse than useless.

May 25, 2021 12:08 am

Oh my, The Limits of Growth. What a Blast From The Past.
Limits of Growth(1972) was the big follow-on to The Population Bomb(1968) by Paul Ehrlich. Together they predicted the total collapse of Western Civilization and the End Of The World by the year 2000. This whole technology-driven End-Of-The-World idea was very popular among the intelligentsia of the day. This was an oddball collection of Marxists, Neo-Marxists, Ivory Tower academics, environmentalists, and their foot soldiers, the drugged out hippie-freak contingent on campus.

Obviously, twenty years after the Collapse of Western Civilization, we can look back and check the veracity of those predictions.
Now here it is, the year 2021, and we have an old Neo-Marxist still banging that drum. It must be sad, in all these years he never came up with anything else, so he just keeps banging on with what he knows. Anyway, it is a good look at the roots of the AGW scare / ideology.
Population Bomb was all about overpopulation + pollution.
Limits To Growth was all about resource depletion.
Global Cooling was there lurking in the background.
CAGW is all about resource usage.
And all of these have one thing in common. The use of science and technology to better the Human Condition across the planet. And they hated it. But one thing they did get right, which was recycling. Look carefully at the CAGW scare / ideology, with the “science” removed. You have the Marxism and Neo-Marxism. You have the anti-science and anti-technology all the while claiming to “Believe in the Science”. And you have the anti-growth and anti-progress positions. All of this recycled from 1968-1972. And this guy shifted smoothly from Limits to Growth to CAGW because at base, it was all the same territory.

Of course, many others have noted the recycling of the ideologies of that era into the CAGW scare. Still it is fun to take a walk down Memory Lane.

Reply to  TonyL
May 25, 2021 4:39 am

That’s racist.

May 25, 2021 12:16 am

This is the same guy who lost a bet 11 years ago because he predicted house prices in Australia was going to drop 40%.

Richard Page
Reply to  Martin
May 25, 2021 3:32 am

Perhaps he should’ve bet his house on it as well, if he was so convinced?

Joel O'Bryan
May 25, 2021 12:30 am

To the Left “war level footing” really means total censorship (sayonara WUWT, they don’t like us) and locking up the people they really don’t like in internment camps. It means rationing and ration cards for the masses. But if you’re superwealthy you’ll be able to buy all the “extra ration credits” from the government you need to maintain your lifestyle … if you are properly connected, just like carbon credits for the wealthy and their private jets.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
May 25, 2021 7:30 am

(sayonara WUWT, they don’t like us)

Witness all the crazy shills that are sent here on a regular basis with standard party talking points. I won’t post a list.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
May 25, 2021 10:04 am

Yes, the “crazy shills” don’t seem to have much staying power. Perhaps their employers are displeased with their lack of effectiveness. I have to hand it to Stokes, however, as he hangs in there, despite sometimes racking up ‘unprecedented’ negative votes. Perhaps his patron is more forgiving.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
May 25, 2021 11:11 am

He’s still behind griff’s record haul, IIRC.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
May 25, 2021 11:49 am

He’s a martyr for the cause; or so he probably thinks

May 25, 2021 12:34 am

Hmmm… UAH6.0 is at -0.05C and global temps will soon fall for 30+ years when the PDO and AMO reenter their respective 30-year cool cycles, which will cause global temp trends to fall to just 0.07C/decade from 1979…

Oh, the humanity…

We actually need a “war-like footing” against the Fascist CAGW advocates who are out to totally destroy Western Civilization, free-enterprise economics, individual life/liberty/property rights, free speech, and implement global totalitarian regimes to control/tax every aspect of our lives.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  SAMURAI
May 25, 2021 1:00 am

Objective evidence stopped being needed or even wanted in the Climate Scam by the scammers over 20 years ago.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
May 25, 2021 1:05 am

Agreed, Joel-san!

CAGW should never had been taken seriously….

Reply to  SAMURAI
May 25, 2021 1:23 am

You need to lift your sights a little, and aim at the elitism based in Fabian Socialism. The alarmist cant for the last 60 has ever and always been whatever is required to move their agenda forward – and, unfortunately, with increasing success.

Joel O'Bryan
May 25, 2021 12:56 am

Reading through this carefully, I see this as an effort to show Ralph Nordhaus he was wrong about the Climate Scammers lack of commitment.

Nordhaus called them all (aka, the Green New Dealers) out in this essay:

where he wrote,

“The fact that virtually no one on the environmental left appears willing to advocate for state-led deployment of low carbon infrastructure and technology suggests that most of the rhetoric on the left about both climate catastrophe and capitalism is hollow. Faced with a choice of big infrastructure and big institutions or egalitarian politics and decentralized technoeconomic systems, progressive environmentalists long ago made their choice. That choice, in the end, must depend on markets, private firms, and entrepreneurial innovation, for the simple reason that it will not entrust sufficient social authority in any political institution that might be capable of planning, financing, building, and operating low carbon infrastructure at the speed and scale that would be remotely commensurate with deeply and rapidly cutting emissions.”

“But the fact that even self-identified Democratic Socialists appear unwilling to call for such a thing suggests that insofar as we are going to make much progress reducing carbon emissions and addressing climate change, we will likely do so in much more incremental, partial, decentralized fashion, making prospects for deep or rapid reductions in emissions extremely unlikely. Practically, we are all neoliberals now. Some of us just haven’t realized it.

It seems to me Keen is simply trying to prove fellow economist Nordhaus is wrong about being a neoLiberal and the hard Left’s commitment to its own insanity.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 25, 2021 7:35 am

Cackling Kamala is another empty suit propped up by the Marxstream Media, who couldn’t even get above 2% support in her own state.

But she does have a list of preferred pronouns.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
May 25, 2021 8:22 am

The only border Kamala has managed to visit is the Canadian one.

Serge Wright
May 25, 2021 1:20 am

“If their warnings had been taken seriously and we’d done as they’d suggested, changing our trajectory from 1975 on, we could have done it gradually using things like carbon tax and so on,”

Interestingly, just 5 years later there was a clear change in trajectory, because since 1980 the collective emissions from the developed world stopped rising and are still the same today despite immigration from the developing world pushing up population in the developed world.

The very rapid rise in emissions since 1990 has been driven by China, who now emits more CO2 than the entire developed world combined and the developing world now emits 2/3 of all emissions and still rising rapidly.

Rob Robertson
May 25, 2021 2:32 am

Steve Keen spent a lot of time predicting the crash of housing in Australia in those years before 2013. Prediction after prediction, and he had me sucked in. Never happened and he disappeared quietly.

Mind you all booms will crash eventually, but his absolute certainty was remarkable.

Mike Lowe
May 25, 2021 2:54 am

Aren’t “academics” like Steve Keen ever conscious of the need to check before they open their mouths and confirm their idiocy? And is there no procedure for removing them from their comfortable sinecures? There sure should be!

Reply to  Mike Lowe
May 25, 2021 11:07 pm

my favourite is:-

Don’t open your mouth before putting your brain into gear”

May 25, 2021 2:57 am

War always favors Capitalism, good profits to be made for the few !
The cannon fodder is just collateral damage.
Read history, start with the Babylonians & end in 2021, same pattern for 8,000yrs.

Reply to  saveenergy
May 25, 2021 11:56 am

I was thinking the same when I saw the title.

Al Kour
Reply to  saveenergy
May 25, 2021 1:16 pm

You are wrong.
Don’t confuse Capitalism and capitalists. Capitalists ( especially Big Capitalists) hate capitalism and support socialist parties, socialist media, socialist think-tanks. Because they know quite well that it’s much easier to profit from government’s contracts, subsidies, and bailouts than operating on free markets.
Actually, every capitalist who gets government’s contract stops being a capitalist and turns de facto into a “red manager”, who receives money not from willing customers but from helpless taxpayers.
So War and Capitalism are antithetical.

May 25, 2021 3:41 am

Yes, we need a war level footing to eradicate these leftist enemies of the human race.

Reply to  2hotel9
May 25, 2021 4:45 am

I thought the warmists were already on a war footing….the propaganda is on full speed and Princess Charles has called or the military to get involved.

May 25, 2021 3:56 am

Is he going to force China and India onto this ‘footing’?

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Rusty
May 25, 2021 1:10 pm

I’d like to see him – and the rest of them – try!

Send them all to China to protest about China’s “emissions,” and see how long they last!

May 25, 2021 5:13 am


The major influences on Keen’s thinking about economics include John Maynard Keynes, Karl Marx, Hyman Minsky, Piero Sraffa, Augusto Graziani, Joseph Alois Schumpeter, Thorstein Veblen, and François Quesnay. Hyman Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis forms the main basis of his major contribution to economics…

Poor Keen. Still angry that Friedman got the Nobel, are we?

May 25, 2021 6:01 am

I am seeing the word “war” used more and more in discussions of climate policy. This should concern anyone involved – synonyms for war include but are not limited to: bloodshed, attack, crusade, siege, vendetta, hostility, antagonism, disunity, and ill-will. Opposites to war include: harmony and peace. It is a striking reversal of the idealism of the flower children from the 1960s. In Canada we are 708 days into the climate emergency decree where the era of perpetual govern-by-emergency is in full swing. In this unlawful new system the government is empowered to put through policies that it would normally not be permitted to do. The checks and balances enshrined in the parliamentary system of the Constitution Act have all but been dismantled. We should all deem war to be abhorrent but instead many appear to embrace it wholeheartedly, with excitement and enthusiasm. In a state-of-emergency war-stance the instruments of coercion (i.e. threats, propaganda, intimidation, force) are fair game.

Reply to  JCM
May 25, 2021 11:20 pm

Usually before war starts, the people who start it, begin by occupying government buildings and waving flags.

After the “legitimate” government takes down the posturing, people get a chance to make a totally fake vote, and the radicals/other opportunists get let in by the front door.

The “new rebel” government which kicked out the old guard, then secures its hold on power by cancelling all future elections, voting in repressive laws, and locking all dissidents in prisons as well as use of well known methods of torture.

This is how it was in Russia in 1917-23, (and is currently in the “stalin burp” phase), Germany in 1933, Crimea since 2014, and how it’s currently playing out in Belarus over the last 27 years (with local variations), with stuff like Srebrenica thrown in next door.

Orwell stated in hommage to Catalonia (where he survived being shot), the worst kind of war known to man is civil war.

Apparently people like Keen would rather like local replays of this old movie scene.
In most civil wars he forgets, it’s ordinary people that suffer while the true monsters like Honecker or Milosevic never have to pay for it.

May 25, 2021 6:30 am

What beachfront property is he aiming for?

May 25, 2021 6:31 am

IYI’s – our universities are full of them.”

It’s ALL a leftist scam – false enviro-hysteria including the Climate and Green-Energy frauds, the full lockdown for Covid-19, the illogical linking of these frauds (“to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change”), paid-and-planned terrorism by Antifa and BLM, and the mail-in ballot USA election scam – it’s all false and fraudulent.

The purported “science” of global warming catastrophism has been disproved numerous ways over the decades. Every one of the warmists’ very-scary predictions, some 80 or so since 1970, have failed to happen. The most objective measure of scientific competence is the ability to correctly predict – and the climate fraudsters have been 100% wrong to date.
There is a powerful logic that says that no rational person can be this wrong, this deliberately obtuse, for this long – that they must have a covert agenda. I made this point circa 2009, and that agenda is now fully exposed – it is the Marxist totalitarian “Great Reset” – “You will own nothing, and you’ll be happy!”
The wolves, proponents of both the very-scary Global Warming / Climate Change scam and the Covid-19 Lockdown scam, know they are lying. Note also how many global “leaders” quickly linked the two scams, stating ”to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change”- utter nonsense, not even plausible enough to be specious.
Regarding the sheep, especially those who inhabit our universities and governments:
The sheep are well-described by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the landmark text “The Black Swan”, as “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot” or IYI – IYI’s hold the warmist views as absolute truths, without ever having spent sufficient effort to investigate them. The false warmist narrative fitted their negative worldview, and they never seriously questioned it by examining the contrary evidence.
The policy incompetence of Western governments over past decades is appalling. By attempting to appease extreme leftists who seek to destroy our economies and our freedoms, governments have adopted a failed strategy that makes us weaker, poorer and at much greater risk.

May 25, 2021 6:31 am

Steve Keen is a native of the world’s loony bin; Australia.

Needless to say he’s rabidly anti-capitalist. Apparently, Keen’s work focused on refuting the neoclassical theory of the firm, which argues that firms will set marginal revenue equal to marginal cost. Keen noted that empirical research finds real firms set price well above marginal cost: they charge a markup, often cost-plus pricing.

A markup! Gosh what a bright spark.

Last edited 26 days ago by fretslider
Carlo, Monte
Reply to  fretslider
May 25, 2021 7:38 am

He figured this out all by himself?

Gordon A. Dressler
May 25, 2021 6:40 am

From the above article: “Part of the problem of course is academics like Steve Keen are way too timid when describing their position.”

The rest of the “problem”—the overwhelming majority of it, in fact—is that academics like Steve Keen cannot even define what “climate change” really is.

To wit, is “climate change”:
— the world getting hotter in summers, or colder in winters?
— the world suffering from flooding, or from droughts?
— the world suffering from too much CO2, or too little CO2 for optimum crop growth to feed humanity?
— the world suffering from too much cloud cover, or too little cloud cover?
— the world suffering from too much or too little atmospheric water vapor (the predominant greenhouse gas)?
— the world suffering from its oceans shifting very slightly in average pH (range of 8.2-8.1)?
— the world suffering from too many insects (pests), or too few insects (species extinction)?
— the world suffering from too many El Ninos, or too many La Ninas?
— the world suffering from too much wind (claimed increase in storms of all types) or too little wind (for windmill power farms to be reliable)?
— the world suffering from currently being in an interglacial period, as opposed to being in a glacial period?
— all of the above, or none of the above but something else?

Furthermore, what is the ideal global climate that all humans need, so as to fight against having any future changes in that climate? And who, or what organization, is to make that determination for all of humanity?

Until one can answer the above questions, it’s all just a big waste of time and money “fighting climate change”, even allowing for human hubris that thinks that is remotely possible.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 25, 2021 10:13 am

I have yet to find an alarmist that can even articulate and defend what the optimum global average temperature should be.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
May 25, 2021 11:14 am

And then articulate how this number represents climate.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
May 25, 2021 12:13 pm

I often ask that question of warmunists.
IF they formulate an answer, it is pre-industrial temperatures. I will then point out that they are referring to the end of the Little Ice Age and should the earth cool that much, they are likely to realize that current times is a lot closer to the earth’s sweet spot for temperatures. And don’t confuse them by citing the increase in arable land in what was previously permafrost and desert. They simply will not understand how the world’s deserts are shrinking. It’s against their religion.

May 25, 2021 7:21 am

‘Mainstream economists “deliberately and completely” ignored scientific data and instead “made up their own numbers” to suit their market models,’

The scientific data is also made up to suit bogus climate models and as far as I’m concerned, SINO’s (scientists in name only) fabricating pseudo science that will enable the destruction of Western economies for no legitimate reason is far worse then economists ignoring the same BS.

May 25, 2021 7:25 am

Solving a problem that does not exist is always difficult because the solvers cannot know what they are dealing with except what they want it to be.

Reginald R. Muskett, Ph.D.
May 25, 2021 7:29 am

“[A] ‘war-level footing'” … when there is no war is insanity!

Shower clouds by howitzers launching 25″ shells … only to fall on cities?

Blitzkrieg the Sun by missiles loaded with SARS-CoV-2?

Drive “nails” into the tectonic plates to stop them?

Bloody insanity.

Jeffery P
May 25, 2021 7:33 am

To borrow from our opponents’ playbook — Steve Keen is not a scientist. Why listen to him? His opinion means nothing.

Snark aside, Steve Keen is a great example of the authoritarianism that pervades the left. If people can’t be convinced to do the ‘right thing” voluntarily, then force them to.

Last edited 26 days ago by Jeffery P
May 25, 2021 8:05 am

Translation: I need a new Mercedes, therefor I need to think up a way to get more grants.

May 25, 2021 8:07 am

Now, a “war-level footing” is required to have any hope of repairing the damage

Once again, the climate alarmists are justifying their desire to go towards full blown communism.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  MarkW
May 25, 2021 1:16 pm

And WTF “damage” is supposed to have occurred, exactly?! There IS no “damage” caused by higher CO2 levels – higher CO2 levels are entirely beneficial.

May 25, 2021 8:56 am

By extension you must know that the researchers at the Wuhan lab were hospitalized in Nov. 2019 because of……… imported climate change.

Steve Z
May 25, 2021 9:10 am

World population estimates in millions:

1972 3,852
1980 4,458 +11.6%
1990 5,327 +19.5%
2000 6,063 +13.8%
2010 6,843 +12.9%
2020 7,764 +13.5%

After the Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” in 1972, world population growth was strongest in the decade between 1980 and 1990, then has slowed to an average of about 13.4% per decade over the past 30 years, which would result in a doubling in 55 years.

Despite the world population having doubled over the past 48 years, there is less hunger and malnutrition now than there was in 1972. This is primarily due to improvements in agriculture, much of which can be traced to the use of fossil fuels in farming equipment and in fertilizers. There may have been a significant contribution by the increase in CO2 concentrations in the air, which speeds up plant growth, but no adherent of the Club of Rome would ever admit it!

As for worries about “bathing in pollution”, much of the air and water over developed countries (including the USA) is actually cleaner now than it was in 1972, mostly because of environmental laws that incentivized businesses to capture as much pollution as economically feasible at the source.

Birth rates have declined in most countries since 1972, but the population continues to increase because people are living longer on average than they did then, with fewer deaths than births. But old people will eventually die, and if birth rates are below “replacement level” (slightly over 2 births per woman) the population will eventually stabilize, or perhaps even decline. People who already have more children than they can afford to support to adulthood will naturally tend to avoid having more children.

The major problem with efforts of “Club of Rome” elites who want to limit population growth is that THEY want to decide who lives and who dies, and how many children each couple is “allowed” to have. Their agenda is not truly to “save the planet” from damage to the biosphere, but to be those who enjoy the benefits and dominate everyone else.

May 25, 2021 9:20 am

Eye candy for the climate crusaders

Bruce Cobb
May 25, 2021 10:13 am

Steve Keen needs a swift hind end footing.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
May 25, 2021 12:05 pm

And a little educating about the benefits of Free Enterprise.

Bob Meyer
May 25, 2021 4:01 pm

The “Moral Equivalent of War” returns every so often.

John Dewey wanted to conscript young men in peacetime to do special industrial work for the state. In 1979 Jimmy Carter wanted to wage the moral equivalent of war on the “energy problem”.

“Carter then launched into his energy policy plans, which included the implementation of mandatory conservation efforts for individuals and businesses and deep cuts in the nation’s dependence on foreign oil through import quotas. He also pledged a “massive commitment of funds and resources” to develop alternative fuel sources including coal, plant products and solar power. He outlined the creation of a “solar bank” that he said would eventually supply 20 percent of the nation’s energy. To jumpstart this program, Carter asked Congress to form an “energy mobilization board” modeled after the War Production Board of World War II, and asked the legislature to enact a “windfall profits tax” immediately to fight inflation and unemployment.”

Read the rest at

Sound a little familiar? And all before CO2 became the progressives’ obsession.

We will hear the stories of the heroic self sacrifice needed to save the world from carbon dioxide and white supremacy (how they’re connected should be fun to hear). Soon we’re going to see conscripted youth bang the drums for Climate Change, Racial Equality and Social Justice. Big business will cheer the new waves of money flowing over them while their smaller competitors are crushed by regulations and taxes. A Brave New World all wrapped up in one totalitarian package.

No totalitarian movement can survive without censorship and forced labor. They go hand in hand. We’re close to censorship now, can conscript labor be far behind?

When you hear calls for war, it’s not the callers who intend to work and die in the trenches.

Bob Meyer
Reply to  Bob Meyer
May 25, 2021 4:42 pm

Correction it was William James not John Dewey who wrote about “The Moral Equivalent of War”. I always get those two confused.

Joseph Muncer
May 26, 2021 5:45 am

The only solution to excess CO2 in the atmosphere is to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and we have the technology to do it with no problems!!! Also we should switch to Thorium Nuclear Powered Electric Generating Stations…..Problems solved……

John the Econ
May 26, 2021 2:29 pm

Mainstream economists “deliberately and completely” ignored scientific data and instead “made up their own numbers” to suit their market models

Ironically impaired, this one.

%d bloggers like this: