Human Exceptionalism

Global Warming Hysteria: Gore’s Profound Faiure of Leadership, Part 2

Whilst in France, I posted about a devastating take down of GWH chief propagandist Al Gore by the noted political scientist Walter Russell Mead. He has now added two more parts to his critique. From “The Failure of Al Gore, Part Deux:”

Gore’s failures are not just about leadership.  The strategic vision he crafted for the global green movement has comprehensively failed.  That is no accident; the entire green policy vision was so poorly conceived, so carelessly constructed, so unbalanced and so rife with contradictions that it could only thrive among activists and enthusiasts.

What was so faulty about the vision in Mead’s view?

To make the case for a proposition like this [Copenhagan], one needs to make the following argument: that the cost of inaction is unacceptably high, that the proposed measures are both feasible and effective, and that there are no easier or cheaper methods of accomplishing the goal.  This is no special set of high hurdles invented for the purpose of frustrating the greens; it is the basic test that any proposal in any arena must pass.

I call that global warming hysteria.  And it fell of its own bloat:

From the beginning, the movement was dogged by what proved to be a fatal flaw.  That problem was and is the sheer expense, complexity and unwieldiness of the GGCT.  The political goal of the global green movement is so enormously complicated, so economically expensive, so administratively difficult, so dependent on the coordination and cooperation of so many different powerful political interests with radically different agendas that its adoption was extremely unlikely.

Mead compares it to the Kellog-Briand Pact to outlaw war.  Ouch. After explaining at length, he skewers Gore:

Mr. Gore’s work up to and including his latest Rolling Stone essay has taken a demagogic rather than intellectual approach.  His method of arguing is to trumpet the science of climate change and to make ad hominem arguments against its opponents.  The science is clear, it is settled, and the opposition against it is funded by people with an economic stake in denial.  I am right about the science and my opponents are a bunch of evil opportunists in it only for the money. That is Mr. Gore’s position, and it is his entire position.  He says nothing about the feasibility of the proposed GGCT or its cost effectiveness.  That, presumably, we must take on faith.

Add in the man’s inability and unwillingness to debate or even answer tough questions. Dripping with disdain, Mead concludes:

The green movement’s core tactic is not to “hide the decline” or otherwise to cook the books of science.  Its core tactic to cloak a comically absurd, impossibly complex and obviously impractical political program in the authority of science.  Let anyone attack the cretinous and rickety construct of policies, trade-offs, offsets and bribes by which the greens plan to govern the world economy in the twenty first century, and they attack you as an anti-science bigot.

To argue with these people about science is to miss the core point.  Even if the science is exactly as Mr. Gore claims, his policies are still useless.  His advocacy is still a distraction.  The movement he heads is still a ship of fools. It is a waste of time to talk science with Al Gore.  It is a waste of time to listen to him at all.  That, apparently, is what the world at long last is beginning to understand.  The policy makers and the heads of state who only two years ago were ready to follow Gore up the mountain have softly and quietly tuned him out.

Well, at least he got filthy rich out of the deal.


The Latest