MacLean’s, April 25, had a lot of coverage of the recent NDP convention. It appears some radicals injected something called the “LEAP Manifesto”, upsetting the applecart. I would describe the LEAP as proposing to shut down my farm, and use the money that realizes to help poor kids. (I know, I can’t see any logic there either).
In an interview with Avi Lewis, one of the LEAP sponsors, MacLean’s asked if he was surprised that critics had labeled it ‘utopian’ and ‘anti-capitalist’. His response almost made me fall off my chair, then laugh out loud. He said “We weren’t surprised in the least that pre-Paleolithic climate-denying curmudgeons like Rex Murphy and Conrad Black would seize upon (it) with glee”.
My goodness, the man has a way with words. But on second thought, I greatly admire both Rex Murphy and Conrad Black, so that makes me a ’pre-Paleolithic climate-denying curmudgeon’ too. Not funny, in fact, an insult. So let’s analyse that a bit.
Start with ‘curmudgeon’. The Oxford English Reference Dictionary, 2003 edition, defines ‘curmudgeon’ as a (noun) “bad-tempered or miserly person”. Well, hey, that fits me right on, but I am at a loss how it applies to Murphy or Black, or fits into a discussion on climate change theology (and it is a religion).
Back up to ‘Pre’, which means before, and Paleolithic, which is a fancy way of saying “stone age”. So, ‘even older than stone age’. I suppose that means fur underwear and dragging a wooden club through the forest looking for something to kill and eat, presumably raw. I have been accused of having some Stone Age attitudes, for example I think we really are better off living in families, but knuckle-dragging is a bit over the top.
Now let’s get to the core of it. Climate-denying? Means nothing, so I suppose he meant ‘climate-change denying’. Now that’s offensive.
Firstly, no sensible person would deny the climate is changing, always has, always will. But he means climate change caused by humans, specifically, burning all the oil and coal and raising the C02 content of the air. There is considerably more scientific evidence for existence of bigfoot running around in our forests, or for space aliens zipping around keeping an eye on us, than there is for C02-caused ‘climate change’. It would be sounder science and economics to build Sanctuaries for Bigfoot and a Spaceport for the aliens than to starve more kids by impoverishing ourselves following the LEAP agenda.
Then we come to ‘denying’ – lefties use the term ‘denier’ as a pejorative and an insult, and this brings us to what this really is, politics, not science. Let’s look at what Avi Lewis must deny to maintain his concern is science-based.
He has to deny that C02 is just the latest in a long string of grotesque over-reactions to hugely exaggerated problems, from Dioxin to PCB to asbestos to mercury to the ozone layer to coming ice age due to our dust and smoke, all the way back to DDT.
He has to deny the existence of the UN’s “Agenda 21” and “New World Order”, programs to save the planet by reducing us all to serfs of the Global Government. He has to deny that the founder of the movement, Maurice Strong, said publicly that the first priority is to destroy the economy of the western world.
He has to deny the New World Order takes away democracy, bureaucrats will rule.
He has to deny the New World Order takes away our freedom and privacy; we will be cogs in a giant wheel.
He has to deny the New World Order takes away our individual rights.
He has to deny the New World Order demands a reduced standard of living for us all.
He has to deny that the Executive secretary of the recent “United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” said that the goal of the process is “a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world”
In other words, there is no science supporting CO2 – caused climate change, and there is plenty of evidence it is part of a political scheme (called ‘Agenda 21’); impoverish and destroy the west in order to force us all into a ‘New World Order’ of a world government. We will all be sheep, and the new government the shepherd. We can already see how that is working out in Europe.
Perhaps we should just refer to the fable of The Emperor’s New Clothes. While the properly brainwashed ‘educated folk’ ooh’d and aah’d, pretending they could see the Emperor’s Invisible Clothes, a small boy asked “why is the king prancing along in his skivvies?” This caused the masses to recognize the elite had been hoodwinked, the invisible clothes did not exist, and they threw the rascals out. Perhaps we ‘Deniers’ are, like the innocent little boy, just insufficiently brainwashed. Perhaps we, like the little boy, are pointing the way. Just a thought.