I would have posted this on Earth Day, but I spent it thinking about some of the strange people that inhabit the planet, particularly those who are on the brink of insanity. Say, for instance, your average liberal from Berkeley:
So right now I am panicking. And in my panicked state, I become shrill and unrealistic. So I am calling for four actions–at least one of which, in particular, is robustly unappealing.
- Beg the rulers of China and India to properly understand their long-term interests;
- Nationalize the energy industry in the United States
I’m not going to bother with his third and fourth propositions, because the first two bullet points are already giving me a headache.
It used to be that liberals called on the United States to be a better member of the “world community” (i.e., they wanted us on equal footing with countries like Iran, North Korea, and any number of backwards nations run by weird warlords with a penchant for tuxedo shoes). That was bad enough… But now we find out it was all one big euphemism for grovelpolitik. Reagan had peace through strength. Your liberal economist from Berkeley has peace through lowliness. The plan seems to become an irrelevant outpost in a world filled with tyranny.
The second point is interesting, in that, if government control was strongly correlated with cleanliness the Soviet Union would have been a paragon of Green Living. Instead, it was simply Red. With blood. I suppose you could count the weird shade of green gulag victims turned after our Commie counterparts were done with them… Sometimes, strange microbial things feed on your body when you die. And bizarrely, there probably is a strain of the environmental movement that quietly cheers Stalin’s handy work in “cutting down on carbon emissions” by millions of cubic tons. I’m assuming they would also redefine murder as “aged zygote termination” or “blastocyst from the pastocyst” wish-fulfillment.
Regardless, the difference between conservatives and liberals when it comes to solving our environmental problems couldn’t be clearer. Liberals have strange self-loathing and subconsciously think we’d all be better off if there were a few billion people less in the world, and conservatives believe the answers to our problems can be found by mining the creative mind of man. We are the world’s greatest resource, whether liberals like it our not. Exhibit A: Alpha Zygote William Shattner.
Want to save the polar bears? (that don’t really need saving…)Want to have a cleaner world? Then have babies. Lots of them. More specifically, I think Americans should have babies.
Whereas liberals debate whether conservation or a Sentinel sized federal government is the proper way to care for the environment, the conservative position should be self-evident: Free countries and free people can unleash the entrepreneurial spirit of their citizens to overcome almost any obstacle. Want a renewable natural resource? Human creativity is a well that never runs dry. You can tap into the human spirit again and again and never come up empty.
The problem is, liberals tend not to trust the population to provide answers to the world’s problems because they’re under the impression it’s filled with racist, bigoted, redneck hicks. And sometimes, people who claim to be of the conservative world view really aren’t. Which is weird because liberal politicians and those who agree with the notion that only mama government can cure what ails you often are rock solid examples of what the human body and human imagination are capable of.
Why is it that liberal self-made millionaires bash the system that made them rich? Why do self-righteous hypocritical filmmakers believe technology and capitalism are great for making 3D movies, but inconsistent with being good stewards of the environment?
Conservatives need to make the case that the way to a “greener” world is by having free people make money -more specifically dollars- and by having their children grow up to be the next Steve Jobs or Bill Gates instead of the next Harry Reid.