Well, thank goodness for that!
Feb 8, 2008 Oppression
Liberal Fascism on National Review Online:
[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.
No, really, it’s okay. God made cliches for this reason. All together now: You can’t make this stuff up!
Liberalism: The comedy / fascism gift that keeps on giving! Via Instapundit.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
You’re listening to Jonah Goldberg on the topic of authoritarianism? That’s like listening to a dog on the topic of toilet paper — what makes him the expert?
February 8th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“You’re listening to Jonah Goldberg on the topic of authoritarianism? That’s like listening to a dog on the topic of toilet paper — what makes him the expert?”
Well, he is on the internet, and as we all know that is the very first step to knowing exactly what you’re talking about.
February 8th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I don’t generally agree with Goldberg, but his description of the book in question is accurate. According to the synopsis of “The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy”:
…Shearman and Smith present evidence that the fundamental problem causing environmental destruction–and climate change in particular–is the operation of liberal democracy. Its flaws and contradictions bestow upon government–and its institutions, laws, and the markets and corporations that provide its sustenance–an inability to make decisions that could provide a sustainable society. Having argued that democracy has failed humanity, the authors go even further and demonstrate that this failure can easily lead to authoritarianism without our even noticing. Even more provocatively, they assert that there is merit in preparing for this eventuality if we want to survive climate change. They are not suggesting that existing authoritarian regimes are more successful in mitigating greenhouse emissions, for to be successful economically they have adopted the market system with alacrity. Nevertheless, the authors conclude that an authoritarian form of government is necessary, but this will be governance by experts and not by those who seek power. There are in existence highly successful authoritarian structures–for example, in medicine and in corporate empires–that are capable of implementing urgent decisions impossible under liberal democracy.
Sounds like some of these climate change experts are Marxists under a green camouflage…
February 8th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
“Sounds like some of these climate change experts are Marxists under a green camouflage…”
Or maybe green is the new red.
February 8th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
And better dead than red, eh Jack?
February 8th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
That’s what we always said when we were shootin at em.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:10 am
I hear you.
February 10th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Why do these horrible liberal-fascist people insist on stopping so-called global warming? I asked this when I was in the home of European liberal-fascism — in Amsterdam. It was pretty scary. People walked, rode their bikes, and took the tram. They look absolutely emaciated compared to your average American! And they harass the entire population with this stupid ticking sound that everyone has to suffer when crossing the street just for the sake of a few blind people! Always pushing an agenda, these horrible Amsterdam people…anyway, I asked them why they are so concerned about this so-called global warming, and they said that if the sea level rises, they go first, because of the canals and all that, and I say, if that’s what the free-market order, that’s what we should have! Stupid liberal-fascists pushing their agenda…it’s Stalinism, really.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
DK, you can be so thick at times it’s astonishing.
This has nothing to do with the policy question about global warning. It has to do about the liberal conception that when its ideas of how to fix the world are to be achieved, it is above any suspicion of seeking power. This is precisely Stalinism.
That you can read right past the suggestion that democracy be abrogated — utterly — in favor of “friendly” technocratic autocracy — because, to you, a particular policy that you believe will end global warming would be promoted thereby proves the point profoundly.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
It has to do about the liberal conception that when its ideas of how to fix the world are to be achieved, it is above any suspicion of seeking power. This is precisely Stalinism.
Stalin was all about the science, then, wasn’t he?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Why not ask him, Ara?
February 10th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Ron, I would love an actual recommendation from you people on how to address global warming in a way 1) acceptable to you and 2) would actually get the job done. The job done sooner, Ron — not in 2090.
Merely calling those of us concerned with these issues Stalinists is hardly going to help the situation. And that is pretty much all we’re getting from your side, accept for the denials that global warming is happening, or more recently, being told that this is even a problem. And of course, none of this addresses the fact that we have a limited supply of oil, and a rising demand for it, and the evil it empowers. And those are Marxists, Ron. Those are despots and worse, fundies, and the two aren’t exactly mutually exclusive, now, are they?
So what are your ideas, Ron? I mean, besides calling us power hungry Marxists.
February 11th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Ron, here’s what I got from the blurb you linked to:
Genetics? Oh, boy. Henry Ford knew a lot about genetics too, Ron. Does that make HIM a scientist?
Stalin didn’t give a crap about science. Stalin (like the inquisitors of Galileo’s day) was a tyrant; if anything, he shipped scientists to Siberia (or worse) for not agreeing with him.
Is this what you learned at Princeton? No wonder people in flyover country hate the Ivy League.
P.S. Your link reminds me of that SNL sketch where it turns out Reagan is an evil genius who speaks 14 languages and never sleeps.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
I love global warming.
It’s one of the things I like best about the internet.
Well, that and modern science.
And modern Fascism.
I don’t much care for Communism and terrorism though, but that’s just me.
If it’s good for other people then that’s their business.
I don’t see that murder and mayhem are good reasons to interfere in other people’s business.
But if communism or terrorism can be linked directly to global warming then that’s probably the way it should be too. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Now if we can only link science to global warming somehow we’ll be one up on Stalin too.
Which, come to think of it, that reminds me of an old personal story that’s kinda humorous.
But that’s a matter for another day.
A red day, a day of ruin…
Not that we’ll live to see it.
Once the polar ice cap melts and there are hot springs baths at Resolute then all bets are off.
See ya 2013, and keep hope alive!!!