.. The environmental case for restrictions and restraint is never made with reluctance. It always comes wrapped up in a moralistic rant against lifestyle choices environmentalists disapprove of, so that most environmentalist arguments could be summarised as follows: catastrophic climate change forces us to do these things, but they are also the right thing to do, and we should do them anyway.
But don’t take it from me. Here’s what Naomi Klein, whose paranoid conspiracy theories made her a star among the anti-globalisation crowd, and who has now turned into a climate priestess, has to say on the issue:
- ‘[P]lanning. Lots and lots of planning.’
- End trade. Not just international trade, but also trade between regions within a country ..
- End economic growth. Start a programme of economic shrinkage ..
- Within what remains of the economy, shrink the share of the private sector
- Stifle what remains of the private sector with taxes and regulation. To achieve this, centralise political power
- If private companies try to find a way around this, nationalise them.
Needless to say, very little of this has anything to do with the climate .. Klein’s text reminds me a bit of a book I read a while ago. It was about a group of ideologues using a strategy of fear and terror to impose far-reaching social changes on a population that would otherwise reject it. Oh wait, that was Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine.