Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October 2nd, 2008

(Post updated)

The Food Climate Research Network says that in future, governments will have to force people to eat climate-friendly foods in order to save the planet. For instance, meat will have to rationed, and consumption of treats such as alcohol and chocolates reduced drastically. They advocate such drastic measures citing evidence that voluntary measures will not work in a crisis.

Even assuming that the science they base their climatological claims on is accurate, have these people ever heard of a cost-benefit analysis? Or maybe they don’t really think this kind of extreme authoritarianism is such a bad thing.

Given a choice between two future worlds, one where sea-levels rise by a few feet over the next hundred years and another where mankind goes back to the prehistoric eras in their standard of living and political systems, I’d choose the former.

The best solutions to global problems, whether it is the environment or the economy, must invoke reason rather than fear, science rather than faith, markets rather than collectivism and take place in a political climate of freedom and entrepreneurship, not one of authoritarianism. Unfortunately, many of the measures advocated by extreme environmentalists are fundamentally anti-progress and anti-freedom and do not deserve a second glance.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »