Loving the Hammer
Oct 11, 2007
I have argued here before that the biggest shortcoming in the global warming debate is that two separate questions are being confounded. These are: (1) Is human activity causing the climate to become warmer through emissions of greenhouse gases? And (2) If so, should the government impose economic regulations to counteract these effects?
Later:
The government is the sole social institution that properly wields force (i.e., through the delegated rights of citizens to use force to defend their lives and rights). All questions regarding whether the government ought to "do something" are thus really questions about whether the government should use force. The proper answer to all such questions -- unless any given proposal would lead to the government better protecting the rights of all citizens -- is "No!" because the sole purpose of the government is to protect individual rights.
That's the problem. Far too many people have no qualms about using government force to mold, and often break, others.
It's for the greater good, damn it!
As a sort of corollary to that, the only great accomplishment of democracy has been to legitimize the sort of abuses that would have been intolerable under a different sort of government. Imagine a king doing to Britain would Tony Blaire did. He'd have been hung by the neck for such invasive, abusive policies, while doing nothing to keep crime under control. The more time you spend living in "democratic" societies, the more you will realize that liberty and democracy are frequently enemies, not friends.
Posted by: MikeT | Oct 13, 2007 at 09:31 AM