I'm becoming increasingly convinced that these sorts of policy "failures" are deliberate.
After all, as gato notes, gigantic, destructive fires are the perfect PR opportunity to push the "climate change" narrative on a population that is increasingly illiterate, innumerate, ignorant and enjoys the attention span of a mayfly.
I'm becoming increasingly convinced that these sorts of policy "failures" are deliberate.
After all, as gato notes, gigantic, destructive fires are the perfect PR opportunity to push the "climate change" narrative on a population that is increasingly illiterate, innumerate, ignorant and enjoys the attention span of a mayfly.
The fact of the matter is, as all reality-based people know, that "climate change" is just another theatre curtain, behind which lie the goal of global totalitarian socialist technocracy.
"...one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth..."
~ IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, November 2010
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world."
~ Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
"We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy."
~ Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation
This sets up a perverse incentive because the more destructive and horrific the fires are, the more PR value they have to spook the herd into giving up yet another tranche of liberty and treasure to Save the Planet™ by enthusiastically embracing their own enslavement and impoverishment.
Certainly, this caveat must be kept in mind:
"Don’t ascribe to malice what can be plainly explained by incompetence."
~ Hanlon's Razor
But just how long must such incompetence continue, in the face of one horrific outcome after another, before malice can be ascribed?
I'm becoming increasingly convinced that these sorts of policy "failures" are deliberate.
After all, as gato notes, gigantic, destructive fires are the perfect PR opportunity to push the "climate change" narrative on a population that is increasingly illiterate, innumerate, ignorant and enjoys the attention span of a mayfly.
The fact of the matter is, as all reality-based people know, that "climate change" is just another theatre curtain, behind which lie the goal of global totalitarian socialist technocracy.
"...one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth..."
~ IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, November 2010
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world."
~ Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
"We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy."
~ Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation
This sets up a perverse incentive because the more destructive and horrific the fires are, the more PR value they have to spook the herd into giving up yet another tranche of liberty and treasure to Save the Planet™ by enthusiastically embracing their own enslavement and impoverishment.
Certainly, this caveat must be kept in mind:
"Don’t ascribe to malice what can be plainly explained by incompetence."
~ Hanlon's Razor
But just how long must such incompetence continue, in the face of one horrific outcome after another, before malice can be ascribed?
some humans are getting more stupid
Sadly, many are in control of big stuff in life. Skeeeery