If you are frightened by David Suzuki's depraved notion of jailing politicans who ignore "all the knowledge and science" of climate change, then this post at National Review ought to shake you to your core.
In a new book, David Shearman and Joseph Wayne Smith take the appeal to experts somewhat further and argue that in order to deal with climate change we need to replace liberal democracy with an authoritarianism of scientific expertise. They write in a recent op-ed:
Liberal democracy is sweet and addictive and indeed in the most extreme case, the USA, unbridled individual liberty overwhelms many of the collective needs of the citizens... There must be open minds to look critically at liberal democracy. Reform must involve the adoption of structures to act quickly regardless of some perceived liberties...
We are going to have to look how authoritarian decisions based on consensus science can be implemented to contain greenhouse emissions.
On their book page they write:
[T]he authors conclude that an authoritarian form of government is necessary, but this will be governance by experts and not by those who seek power.
The more environmentalists speak, the farther they drop the mask on their true intentions, the more evident is the increasing politicization and subjectivity of "science", and the more we understand about where the global warming scam is headed.
There are indeed two chief enemies of liberal democracy in addition to islamic jihadism:
- Scientists with a penchant for expert authoritarianism, and
- Our learned deference to so-called expert opinion; our near reverence of anyone sporting a PhD.
5 comments:
I am an expert at moderating overly eager experts and scientists, but running the country is too time consuming, so for the moment, I shall respectfully decline this tempting opportunity. = TG
Technocracy, Inc., redux
There must be open minds to look critically at liberal democracy.
Alan Bloom, a professor of progressive leanings, wrote a book called "The Closing of the American Mind". He credited the loss of (true) liberal values with the closing of minds. Using open minds to curtail liberal democracy seems ... ironic?
This should do wonders for the sales of "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. At least it will give him material for the 2nd ed.
I thought you were joking until I read it elsewhere.
Academics are, to an incredible extent, out of touch with reality. Outside their narrow area of expertise they are as ignorant as the next person. Experts should give advice, but never get the final say.
Of course, the larger issue here is the suppression of democracy and personal freedom.
……..Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral [CLIMATE] busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience….. C. S. Lewis
Perhaps David Suziki should be forced to drive a SUV and drink bottled water, since he favours the removal of personal liberties from the rest of us.
Post a Comment