FROM BAN THE HYDROGEN BOMB TO BANNING HYDROCARBON FUELS: THE LEFT’S FAILED GLOBAL SALVATION MOVEMENTS

 

  

 

  From President Obama and UN Secretary Ban Ki-Moon on down to most scientists, academics, media people and leftist pols they are truly and frighteningly convinced that the world is going to hell from the massive, growing use of hydrocarbon fuels powering world economies especially in developing countries. And while the battle rages to drastically cut carbon emissions many on the Left are at the edge of despair or falling off of the cliff thinking it may be too late; that the war against dirty energy is unwinnable and being lost; that the human race they tried to scare with the "truth" and collectively save has reached the tipping point headed for Armageddon before the century's end. What a horror this is for them! Powerless they watch like mad Cassandras as the ignorant, selfish, gas guzzling masses (more concerned with ISIS than the global warming "crisis") head toward a future of worsening bad weather events: heatwaves, fires, droughts, more powerful storms and rising flood waters from melting ice caps at either pole. Climate catastrophe is at hand. The unthinkable is here. And all they can do is curse and scream at the stupidity of man as he races toward extinction in a genocidal, climate-crashing holocaust. What a nightmare!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 But we've seen this doomsday movie before. For the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) scare is a leftist variation of the ban the bomb movement (BTB) where the lunatic fringe insanely believed that America was the cause of the Cold War with Russia-which could get hot; and that if we hadn't built the bomb the Soviets wouldn't have it (they built it out of fear); and that if this country unilaterally disarmed and became nuke free Russia (no longer feeling threatened by a nuclear armed US) would follow suit and peace would reign and humanity saved from World War III-a world ending nuclear holocaust where "the living would envy the dead," as Jonathan Schell said. And what was the outcome? We didn't disarm, there was no war, and the Soviet Union peacefully disappeared-taking with it the threat of nuclear war-as they were its cause.

 

 

 

But ending the Cold War didn't end the Left's need for global social movements and world saving schemes; and into the vacuüm leapt Climate Change. Banning the hydrogen bomb was replaced by hysteria over the lethal, growing, global warming use of dirty, polluting hydrocarbon fuels-now seen as the new existential threat the Left would compassionately save us from. 

 

 

 

 

 In short, the global warming movement is the new incarnation of the failed ban the bomb movement-and headed for the same fate. BTB started in the 1950s and peaked in the 80s with the Soviet-backed Nuclear Freeze Movement (supported by our President and VP) before it slid into decline and near extinction (there's still a bit of it left). AGW started in the 1990s and peaked in the winter of 2009-2010 with the East Anglia e-mail scandal and Copenhagen Conference (held during record breaking snow and cold). Since then AGW has been in free fall headed (like its predecessor) into the ash heap of leftist history.

 

But what I wonder lies ahead for the compassionate, socialist, bleeding heart Left? With what will they fill the vacuüm caused by the coming of AGW's death? Or, is that it? Is AGW its last hurrah for large world-saving social schemes?  Its last hysterical doomsday cry for global solutions to human survival? I hope so. But I wouldn't bet on it. For the Left is very deft when it comes to dreaming up existential-global threats.

 

 

 

21 thoughts on “FROM BAN THE HYDROGEN BOMB TO BANNING HYDROCARBON FUELS: THE LEFT’S FAILED GLOBAL SALVATION MOVEMENTS

    1. Fascist con. You can’t defeat us so you want to ban us? Don’t tell me you believe in the constitution and other founding documents.

      1. I laugh my conservative ass off whenever a leftist uses commie Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple to discredit Christianity and religion.

  1. Apollo:

    I don’t quite understand your post. If you’re understanding of the AGW cause is modeled on the failed ban the bomb movement then how can you say that the former is based on a fiction when the latter wasn’t? The US and Soviet Union were nuclear armed ideological adversaries in a bi-polar (East vs, West) world. This made the threat of nuclear war very, very real; just as the threat of AGW is real and will likely happen if we don’t drastically curtail GHG emissions.

  2. From the start of the Cold War to the collapse of the Soviet Union Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) made a nuclear conflict highly, highly unlikely between the superpowers. And there was none. On the other hand, the BTB movement was based on the opposite hysterical view that MAD was wrong; and there was a good chance that as long as a nuclear armed US and Russia were enemies they’d go to war and use their nukes. My contention is that catastrophic AGW is as unlikely as was a nuclear war between the superpowers.

  3. Apollo says in his provocative article “the Left is very deft when it comes to dreaming up existential-global threats.” and so they are. What could come after AGW is anyone’s guess.

  4. There’s a 97% consensus among scientists that AGW is very real and a threat to the survival of our species. What are the chances that it can be wrong? One in multi- millions. This makes you people delusional.

    1. Listen granny, we know the “consensus” of Climate Scientists was achieved through intimidation in a “rigged” system. Pro-AGW editorial staff and pro-AGW reviewers actively censored papers that did not support AGW. A politicized government grant process steered grants toward pro-AGW research. Climate scientists quickly got the message that skeptical research jeopardized their academic careers in a publish or perish world. Your 97% consensus among Climate scientists is proof that intimidation works. They do not however prove AGW.

      Go outside the Climate science community and the 97% consensus among scientists falls apart. Meterologists for instance have a strong skeptic contingent.

        1. I deny nothing granny The planet has warmed, the planet has cooled, and for the last 18 years, it has gone nowhere proving the 97% and their predictions of soaring temperatures wrong.

  5. Original approach to the subject of AGW, Apollo. A great read. I never fail to learn something new from you. The Left, indeed, has a need for world salvation schemes. And as AGW crashes and burns the hunt will begin for a new phony existential crisis to frighten people.

    1. From nuclear winter to global warming the left never gives up on its phony apocalyptic scaremonerging scenarios. Fortunely they’re being defeated again just as they were in the the 1980s by Ronald Reagan.

  6. I vividly recall the rowdy nuclear freeze demos here in New York with their stupid bumper sticker slogan “Freeze Now Or Die.” Good thing Reagan but them on ignore. Not doing so would have prolonged the Cold War. Now we have the same nincompoops carrying on about a world ending carbon crisis. GAWD!

    1. Back in the 80s I participated in the anti-Freeze counter demonstrations. From “Freeze Now or Die (or was it Fry?)” it’s now Clean Energy Or Die. Equally senseless lunacy.

      1. When I was a kid my lib parents (both dead) took me and my younger sister to a Nuclear Freeze rally at the UN. I remember them carrying a sign that read, It’s Better To Be Active Today Than Radioactive Tomorrow. Did you ever hear anything so stupid?

    2. Thanks for the watches post. My spouse and i have continually noticed that almost all people are needing to lose weight because they wish to show up slim along with attractive. However watches, they do not always realize that there are other benefits for you to losing weight as well. Doctors say that overweight people suffer from a variety of watches conditions that can be perfectely attributed to the excess weight.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *