Why We Must Push Back Against “Climate Change” Hysteria

The other day I filmed a short video catalogued in my website archive (semperluxmundi.org) under “A Culture of Slanders and Slurs”.  The library of about two dozen videos now addresses topics related to religious faith in a straightforward manner: no virtue-signaling allowed.  I thought it was time in this particular series to call out the unscrupulous among us who abuse language in such a way as to sequester defenders of certain views from consideration as human beings.  Of course, “racist” is now such a slur, and I am about to dedicate another video to the word “Nazi”.  “Climate-change denier” has never really caught on, thanks to being quite unwieldy—but the notion behind the phrase is the same: those who “deny” climate change deserve whatever mistreatment comes their way.  Not only must we not give them a hearing; we should entertain giving them jail time, or maybe shooting them like dogs.

I placed the word “deny” in quotations above because denial isn’t even what’s properly at issue (any more than is “climate change” per se; the mandatory article of faith is really that global climate is rapidly, radically changing due to manmade influences).  My talk—and you can do just so much in fifteen minutes, alas—began by stressing that, as a lifelong enemy of the automobile and of our congested urban environments, I have left considerably lighter carbon footprints behind me than most people.  I then spent several minutes emphasizing that mere measurement of relevant climatic data is an enormously complex task.  Readings must be obtained at uniform geographical and chronological intervals from around the world, a requirement which undermines confident conclusions at our point in history right out of the gate.  Perceived changes in weather during one human lifetime qualify as evidence neither by the spatial nor the temporal standard; for none of us spends an hour per month at a hundred locations equally spaced around Earth’s sphere, and none of us lives the many centuries necessary to uncover a meaningful pattern.

This doesn’t make me a “denier”; it makes me a voice of restraint before those who insist upon rushing to unjustified conclusions.  I wish I’d had time to handle more adequately the dubious motives of many at the “movement’s” fore who busy themselves stirring the rush into a stampede.  Peter Helmes has often offered analyses of that caliber through his site, Die Deutsche Konservativen. One of his posts a couple of weeks ago noted that Greta Thunberg’s father has grown rather wealthy off of two concerns dedicated to marketing his eerily wooden and humorless “Green Joan of Arc” daughter; and the post concludes, all in boldface, Um es nochmals klar zu sagen: Dahinter stehen keine Idealisten, sondern knallharte Großkapitalisten. Wo deren Interesse liegt, dürfte jedem normal denkenden Menschen klar sein. Translation: “To say it plainly, there are no idealists standing behind [climate change hysteria], but hard-boiled capitalist tycoons.  Every competently thoughtful person should be clear about where the interests of such types lie.”

When I still possessed a small soapbox in academe from which to prod freshmen, I tended to proceed very cautiously into the realms of chemistry and atmospheric science.  Those weren’t my field.  Some of my students could have diagrammed complex molecules while I was still trying to figure out how carbon dioxide can poison plants.  (Can it?  An intrepid investigator probing a volcanic lake on the History Channel made that claim within my hearing… but the minute rise in global CO2 seems to be feeding plants handsomely in locations that aren’t fuming with sulfur.)  Behind my rostrum, then, I always contented myself with making a few very basic, even “dummy” observations.  1) Carbon dioxide is less than one half of one hundredth of one percent of the earth’s atmosphere; it’s hard to see how fluctuations in thousandths of a percentage point spell Armageddon.  2) Of that tiny amount, only about two percent arises from manmade sources.  3) Of those manmade sources, India and China are by far the most prolific contributors—and neither of those nations is in the least interested in curbing its industrial growth.

If the West, and the U.S. in particular, were to fragment its industrial/technological foundation for the very doubtful purpose of reducing CO2 emissions by .00003%, the following disastrous environmental consequence would therefore follow.  The “People’s Republic” of China would have a path free and clear to dominate utterly the world’s economy, and hence to determine in large measure the social and political organization of every individual society. In other words, the single greatest environmental poisoner in our planet’s history (with the possible exception of the post-Chernobyl Soviet Union) would be calling all the tunes globally.

Is this what we want?  Is this what any person sincerely concerned about life on Earth would want?  For several decades, we have seen (if we have eyes to see) how much the Chinese oligarchy cares about its own citizens.  I’ve noticed in reading the testimonies of Chinese citizens who speak out too daringly and are “invited for a cup of tea” at police headquarters that practically all detainees, when they know they’re not going home for several weeks, worry about not having their meds.  Everyone in urban China is on meds!  That’s because the air is poison to breathe.  (Remember a few years back when a massive effort was made to cleanse to skies temporarily over Beijing for the opening Olympic ceremony?)  We’re getting a refresher course right now, if we need one, on just how highly the PRC elite value the lives of ordinary people.  To the Party’s chosen few, handling the Coronavirus is primarily an exercise in public-relations damage control.  If the disease isn’t diagnosed, then ensuing death cannot be attributed to it… and only about one patient in ten was being tested for infection even in the early days of the outbreak, before resources gave out.

These are the people to whom we will surrender the planet’s health, should we throttle all fossil-fuel consumption, refuse to build nuclear power plants, and wait for the wind to turn blades on the high plains.  This is the “green” plan to save us all!

I also used to stress to my students, as I stress in the video and continue to underscore, that pointing all solutions in the direction of a more intrusive government smells very, very fishy.  It is especially so inasmuch as big government created most of the problem, to begin with.  After World War II, our federal government, favoring certain players in the transportation sector over others, pumped millions into producing a national car- and airline-dependency among us while leaving our substantial railways to languish.  (Trains move loads about fifteen times more cost-effectively, by the way, than trucks… but the Teamsters’ Union had a louder voice.)  On a local level, municipalities of the Fifties rigorously began to zone out your corner drugstore, your handy barber shop, your neighborhood school and pediatrician—which, of course, created real estate and building booms as well as forcing Middle America to invest heavily in cars, in gas and oil, in insurance, and so forth.  Meanwhile, lawyers, lawsuits, regulations, and inspectors converged upon Plainville, USA, the way vultures compete for a carcass.  Federal bureaucracies like OSHA hounded small-business owners even after they had duly shifted their shingle from Laurel Lane to Main Street.  Many of these hard-working people surrendered, dissolving their business and entering the daily rush-hour file of traffic to get to a corporation’s megalopolitan plant or office tower.

If we simply eradicated these zoning restrictions and micro-managing bureaucracies, we would preserve immense amounts of oil, reduce incalculable volumes of traffic-related stress and injury, almost nullify the crime endemic to periodically emptied neighborhoods, foster an environment where citizens were much happier thanks to a much more human level of contact with each other… but no.  No.  More government, more regimentation—that’s worked so well for us in the past! Let’s just amp it up.

Meanwhile, merely for raising your hand and daring to ask a question about any aspect of the “climate change agenda”, you make yourself a target for doxing, canceling, incarcerating… you’re a public spittoon.  This is your reward for suggesting that, if the emperor’s new clothes are invisible, maybe it’s because they don’t exist rather than because you’re blind.  This is our current level of insanity.  This is how well we’ve been groomed for rule by the idiot-producing ideologues controlling our classrooms, and by marketplace and political despots ranging from George Soros to Xi Jinping (who both turn out to be financing much of what happens in our classrooms).

Indeed, my ultimate question of our “social conscience” warriors—far down the list, and not an item that I would ask in a townhall meeting—nags at me more than any uncertainty I have about science.  How many of these self-declared moral beacons, I should like to know, who lead the chanting chorus of, “Climate-change denier!” as the mob gathers, are being remunerated rather directly by Soros, Xi, Robert Fink, or the Rothschilds’ Bank of England?  Conspiracy theory?  Why, hell yes, it’s conspiracy theory!  Have you not yet awakened to the fact that all truth in these “post-fact” times is suffocating under the bedsheets of conspiracy-theory quarantine?

Sometimes the Only Alternative to “Conspiracy Theory” Is Lobotomy

nightmareEB 2

I believe I have found an appropriate synonym for the unwieldy phrase, “engaging in conspiracy theory”. Let’s just call it “thinking”.

Say that a young man’s date for Friday night cancels on Friday afternoon, pleading that an intense migraine has overtaken her. Disconsolate, he wanders into the local watering hole later that evening… where he spies his girlfriend absorbing cocktails and laughing in brave defiance of the famous headache as a tall, dapper stranger whispers in her ear. Our young man thinks… what? That he’s been misled? That he’s been played? Why, he deserves to be jilted if that’s what he’s made of! Conspiracy theorist!

Your high-school-senior son says he’ll be out late on Saturday night—not to wait up, that he and his friends have formed a study group to ace all of next week’s final exams. You take him at his word and go to bed. The next morning, you find his book bag just where he left it upon returning from classes Friday afternoon. Out in the garage, you discover his hand-me-down car wedged in at a very odd angle and notice empty beer cans knocking around in the back seat. And you conclude… what? That he didn’t spend the night studying? I hope they come arrest you, you… you conspiracy theorist!

John Stossel dared to point out last Wednesday that our 23 trillion debt hasn’t faded away, despite what appears to be a rip-roaring economy.  Indeed, the debt continues to mushroom, and Mr. Stossel notes that a day of reckoning must come. These facts can hardly come as a dazzling revelation to elected representatives of either party, yet neither Democrats nor Republicans have the stomach to carve a dime from our entitlement programs. That’s by no means shocking, and the major fault for their paralysis lies with us. Every politico on either side of the aisle knows that fiscal responsibility is the kiss of death, so both wait for the other side to make the fatal move in a game of “chicken”….

Or so one might have said fifteen years ago, when the looming catastrophe was already fully visible. These days, however, Democrats are not simply waiting for Republicans to cave in and show an understanding of elementary arithmetic. No: every Democratic candidate for president is trying to outbid the others in exorbitant offers of “free stuff”—free health care, free college, free annual income. Free citizenship, even—a free right to vote on how much of other people’s money you want to pocket, freedom from prosecution when you break the nation’s laws, freedom to vote (once again) when you’re clumsy enough to get yourself sent away to prison for lawbreaking too spectacular to be ignored.

And… and is there no endgame here, beyond getting elected? Is that what we are to think—that every single Democrat in office or seeking office nowadays is so incredibly stupid as not to understand that we have no cash for such palaces of fantasy? Some, to be sure, are stunningly challenged by basic addition (especially those with economics degrees from Ivy League institutions). But all of them?

Well, yes, that’s precisely what we are to think, what we must think… unless we wish to descend into the vile, malodorous realm of conspiracy theory!

We must assume, furthermore, that no Democrat has a plan for what to do when Social Security and Medicare checks dry up, when rioting breaks out in the streets, when the nation from coast to coast begins to look like San Francisco. For if such a plan exists, counting on a crisis which must not “go to waste”… wouldn’t that be a conspiracy?

Bestowing the right to vote upon felons and foreign nationals begins to look like a plan of some particularly dark design, especially when you factor in the Democratic Party’s zeal for denying legal citizens their Second Amendment rights. Is this merely a matter of adding the criminal vote (and the child vote, if Pelosi had her druthers) to the dead vote in order to ensure permanent Democrat hegemony… or is massive civil unrest being courted to justify calling out the National Guard, transforming it into the National Police Force dreamt of by Barack Obama, suspending elections, and settling into a true socialist oligarchy in the grand old Soviet or Maoist style? The whole thing begins to look like… but, nah! Pull yourself up short and take several steps back! You know where that kind of thinking leads!

Now, Republicans don’t open the border to terrorists while taking defensive weapons at gunpoint from legal citizens. They don’t invite Israelis to vacation by the thousand in Chicago during the first week of November and bestow upon them the right to vote as pro tempore residents. They actually resign if caught having sex with the cleaning lady’s underaged daughter, and they hold the Constitution in highest regard… except that, you know, the President is the Commander in Chief, and waging war in that capacity is sometimes a bit hampered by the need of a formal declaration from the Senate. It’s important to whisk around this small planet like Superman and stay the raised hand of the evil-doer… so important that parliamentary procedure sometimes gets trimmed at the edges. Islamo-fascism has to be nipped in the bud wherever its dark flower breaks the surface; the Religion of Peace has to be given a chance to nourish new democracies and marketplaces.

Although… one would think that, with such a keen interest in defense, the Republicans would address themselves to seeking an alliance with Putin’s Russia instead of driving her closer and closer into the embrace of Red China, the one nation on earth aggressively, openly gobbling up its neighbors or commandeering their resources while conducting campaigns of ethnic cleansing and instituting Orwellian monitoring of ordinary people. One would think that continuing to feed Wall Street by allowing the PRC to take over vast portions of our industrial sector and purloin all of our intellectual property of value would stir Republican indignation.

One would think, most especially, that Republicans would have been clamoring to have the national power grid secured against electro-magnetic pulse attack and solar flares during the Ryan/Boehner years of enjoying substantial power in Congress. After all, if ninety percent of the North American populace would die in the wake of a catastrophic nation-wide power outage, if this has been understood since the late twentieth century, if the cost of hardening the grid is relatively minuscule, and if Republicans are such valiant hawks in the matter of providing our military with tanks (as opposed, say, to modernizing the nuclear arsenal)… well… well, what?

One of my Republican senators responded last week to my letter expressing concern about the unsecured grid with an assurance (and I’ve no doubt that this was an auto-responder’s assurance) that he cared about “climate change” and, to that end, was doing his all to advance the construction of a nuclear power plant. Fine. Thanks for listening.

Perhaps we witness here a mere greasing of conventional pockets in the energy sector, just as we see in Democrats a mere pandering to the “what’s in it for me?” crowd with endless offers of free stuff from other people’s closets. Perhaps there really is nothing to see here, on either side. One doesn’t like to be a… you know: a conspiracy theorist!

But as I mused at the end of my just-published essays collected over a period fifteen years, Nightmare Made of Dreams: A Conservative Scholar Assesses Our Nation’s Declining Taste for Self-Sufficiency, there’s something really odd going on under our noses. The phenomenon now popularly known as the Phoenix Lights occurred over twenty years ago. It was seen by thousands (including Governor Fife Symington of Arizona) and photographed or videoed by dozens, perhaps hundreds. Strange craft were silently executing maneuvers over a major southwestern metropolitan area that any Physics or Engineering professor at any public university would denounce as patently impossible. Somebody did that… and somebody in our government knows who the somebody was. I have a feeling—not an articulated theory, just a feeling—that our off-budget defense programs are vastly more advanced than most of us believe (whether or not the craft over Phoenix were built at Area 51 or on Alpha Centauri b). That hunch consoles me. It would be nice if our defenses were indeed much more sophisticated than they appear to the casual eye. I can also muster little outrage at the utterly covert nature of such projects (though why one of them went overt on March 13, 1997, is a puzzler). If you reckon for a moment how leaky our “security” agencies have been around the Trump Administration, and if you then consider the premier importance of projects like these, you’d want another blanket of secrecy thrown over them rather than more sunlight penetrating to them.

Yet there remains that deadly sunlight—those solar flares against which our grid is not secure. How can a nation whose elite engineers have refined the ability to defy gravity not have built Faraday cages around its power generators? That’s like asking how a nuclear submarine cannot have a protocol to see that someone shuts the hatch before a dive.

What’s the game? As a citizen, I say to my representatives, “I don’t want to know all your secrets. I shouldn’t know them… because if such a one as I knows them, then the Chinese surely will. I don’t even want to write a futuristic novel wherein you happy few retreat to Dr. Strangelove’s bunker, let the rest of us rioting rabble die of starvation and self-slaughter, and then climb out in eight months to repel the Red Guard with flying saucers. But is something like that really the plan? Does the plan really require that we and our children and grandchildren die like rats on the Flying Dutchman? Is something like that in store for us? No? Then why won’t you secure the damn grid?”

The iChute to e-Slaughter: Come Right In

Fortunately, I was able both to have my ancient Mac resuscitated and to find a newer, refurbished model at a reasonable price (since I know that Old Nellie must expire of exhaustion eventually).  Yet the more recent model—and, being of 2016 vintage, it will already be viewed by some as a clunker—presents certain problems.  What bothers me most is that I cannot back up my files after doing a bit of writing or editing.  A thumb drive will not fit a Thunderbolt port; such a device requires (let me see if I can remember all this) a USB Type A female port.  Can I sue Apple for not creating gender-fluid ports, so that I needn’t spend anywhere from twenty to a hundred bucks on more hardware?

Well, no: Apple makes most of its money off of innumerable adapters that must be purchased along with every upgrade.  So I was told by a very helpful chap at Wal-Mart, after he apologized for his store’s not being licensed to market Apple products.  (I’m guessing that the Fruit people demand an exorbitant skim-off for every sale.)  My brain started spinning and spinning.  What to do… where to go?  Hey, what if I just email to myself each altered file as an attachment, then collect it on my old Mac and save to a back-up device?  Fine… except that the purchase of the new (or refurbished) Mac was intended to anticipate the day when the old model refuses to work.  Hmm.

I asked my son what he does in such cases.  Easy: he saves to “the Cloud”—to iCloud.  Pictures, videos… whatever he wants is secured out in cyberspace.  After a little further thought, however, I had another round of misgivings.  In the event of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse, the Cloud would probably be obliterated (and pardon my writer’s vanity: an EMP would destroy a lot more than my classic novels—I merely point out that one reason for backing up would be nullified).  Perhaps even more disturbing—for an EMP may at least be a simple natural occurrence—is the “i” in iCloud.  Yet another chunk of my life surrendered to the avuncular hands of Apple….  The big red Eden-spoiler already owns the means of my authorial production, and already bleeds me dry when these means spiral into their planned obsolescence.  Saving my work to iCloud will also place in its clutches my most intimate thoughts and painstaking creations.

Do I want that?  Do we?  Between the two of them, Apple and Microsoft (but especially the latter) have encroached upon governmental and educational services to the point that they nestle deep in our kitchens, our dens, our bedrooms, and our children’s lives.  They practically own us.  They are very near to crossing the line that separates a permitted monopoly from an arm of government.  What happens if the successors of Steve Jobs decide that my forthcoming short story collection expresses too many politically incorrect sentiments?  Might I attempt to access a saved file of my work from the Cloud one day only to find broad gray lacunae in the text where “naughty bits” have been purged by Super-Nanny?

It’s already happening on Twitter: the Gray Gap.  One sees it up and down the screen.  “This Tweet is no longer available,” “This Tweet contains sensitive content,” and so forth.  If the suppressed Tweet is accessible in such cases, I certainly don’t know how to reach it (and I admit to being a Twitter ingénue).  What I see is a lot of mutilated or truncated discussion whose thrust is no longer coherent.  Very clever: KGB-clever.  Neutralize the obnoxious opinion or sentiment by depriving it of any context, so that it becomes mere words in a vacuum.

Of course, Twitter has grown vastly more infamous (like the odious Facebook) for pulling its hair-trigger ban on contributors who are deemed by a logarithm to have uncooperative or disruptive principles.  The sort of operation going on here is itself the source of a rising controversy: viz., should a privately owned and operated platform for communication be allowed to refuse access to views repellent to its ownership?  Last night I heard an eloquent but Facebook-banned commentator (I can’t seem to retrieve his name: search “Tucker Carlson guests 4/5/2019” and you dredge up lots of invective against Tucker Carlson) explain that such media platforms have in fact ascended to their present position of exclusive influence thanks to government intervention.  I couldn’t follow the intricacies of the explanation, for it was hasty and forced into a very narrow window (as is typical of all communication nowadays); but I recognize the pattern.  The line between private and public sector, for all practical purposes, doesn’t exist in these cases.  It exists for display: it exists as part of the propagandistic delivery system.

My helpful friend at Wal-Mart sermonized that such is the capitalist mechanism: less and less consideration for the customer, more and more manipulation of the marketing process to squeeze out profit.  I remonstrated with him just a bit.  This is the mechanism of late capitalism as it dangerously veers into corporatism.  In the old days, free enterprise was precisely the engine that promoted courtesy to clients, individuation of product, respect for the patron’s tastes and privacy… and the forces that have hounded those benign small competitors off the evolutionary plain and left it to voracious predators mostly point back to government intrusion (often invited by the emerging monsters).

The text of my own sermon would be this, in a nutshell: you cannot oppose such abuses as the monopolizing of our means of communication by favoring more government, for government was the initial lubricant of these abuses.  An alien pair of eyes peering into your bedroom will not be chastened by a new pair of peering eyes—not just because the former is paid by a corporation and the latter by your taxes.  You are being watched and will be watched more in the future.  Insofar as it’s still possible, try to learn how to build a tent.

The Dark Elite (Part One)

I don’t know how long I’m going to ride a wave of thoughts that has swept me up lately… and I don’t know, either, where the wave will carry me. Some of you may be interested in following; and in that case, we’ll find out together what strange coast lies before us. I do have a feeling, already, that it’s littered with bones.

The first notion of which I’ve had to rid myself in pondering the Dark Elite (i.e., the select few who really rule us) is that the corporate private sector and the political public sector have any significant degree of separation. They don’t. There is no “industrial-political complex”—only a single corporate monstrosity whose tentacles extend into both public and private domains. Big business gives donations to politicians; then government passes laws favorable to the proliferation of mega-business activity. The activity produces or takes away jobs in this or that locale or sector while multiplying product. Prices rise on cutting-edge technology and lower for the obsolescent, the reduced-capacity, and the knock-off. Politicians represent all of these changes in a “narrative” (as it’s now called) that best serves their bid to stay in power. They may elevate taxes on their profiteering business cronies while also sullying their name in public; but the tax hike is paid for by higher consumer prices, hidden deductions, and lucrative government contracts. Not since Richard Burton and Liz have two entities fought so openly while spending so much time in bed together off camera.

Computer-related industries and their offshoots have consistently posed the most obvious manifestation of this unholy marriage from my perch of observation (as an educator) for the past two decades. From a capitalist perspective, the wonderful thing about the digital revolution is a) that “old stuff” is utterly useless—a PC literally cannot negotiate today’s Internet through a landline; and b) that stuff gets old very, very quickly. Obsolescence may now occur within a year, requiring the purchase of state-of-the-art gadgetry at premium cost. The Managerial State has been surprisingly slow to harvest the enormous propagandistic benefits offered by this technology; but we should note that such “benefits” are latent and always ready for exploitation, should our elected officials decide to take the next Orwellian step. The Obama IRS, it is true, showed much talent for the game; and senior officials appointed to the Department of Justice, the FBI, and other strong-arm bureaucracies by that administration continue to resist the exposure of their lairs to the sunlight. We know this crew popularly as the Deep State—which is not, however, the same thing as the Dark Elite. The former merely defends its careerist turf; the latter intends to rule the world.

Now, the appendage of the State that we may call Security—which includes the FBI and the police and military generally, but is increasingly out of uniform and unequipped with firearms—has in fact begun to open wireless windows through which Big Brother may watch. Yet Security’s vigilance, again, is not motivated by the partisan ends of preserving careers and impeding unsympathetic political movements. At least at the Dark Elite level, it compiles dossiers on everyone everywhere, and does so with no short-term objective in mind. We will attempt to unknot this loop of the nexus later. For the moment, we may be thankful that Security presently operates with an almost blatant and arrogant defiance of mega-business’s elected, constantly legislating pimps and panders.

Or so it seems to me. That is, most politicians, to this day, continue to fund vast phone banks at their campaign headquarters and to travel about kissing babies and belting down hot dogs. They are apt to be digital imbeciles. Their forte, after all, is tugging at collegial elbows, passing notes under the table, and smuggling into bills indecipherable riders that award special privileges to their donors. They don’t actually use the Internet themselves: they just advance legislation that makes everyone else use it. Medical records pile up in databases like stalled traffic during an LA rush hour, the NSA’s backlog of unsifted data mounts at a faster rate than the national debt, and identity theft spreads across the Internet like a digital version of Ebola… but our lawmakers persist in delivering more and more of our daily lives to the Cloud. It’s progress.

In my opinion, then, most politicians are not so much “members of the illuminati” as they are unwitting facilitators of an ambitious few. Their objective is to get rich—through contributions, perks, speaking fees, book deals, and (after retirement) consulting fees. Accusing them of participation in global conspiracy is, generally speaking, an undeserved compliment. In the stupidity of the short-sighted, they settle for a small fortune rather than angle for control of the world. The more narcissistic they are (viz. both of our most recent presidents), the less fit their temperament clearly is for manipulating our lives behind the scenes. Any true member of the Dark Elite would be delighted to preserve complete anonymity, or at least to be thought boring and negligible. A Bill Clinton, a Barack Obama, or a Donald Trump would wither under such negligence. Everyone must notice his entry into a room and concede him to be far and away the most important person in it. Hillary Clinton might nearly have been cut from the right shade of dark cloth… but she failed to reach the cave’s inner sanctum because she couldn’t keep her fingers off all the baubles lying along the way. Vladimir Putin is perhaps the one top-tier politico who also, in stunning paradox, has the ability to lower his profile and pass by scarcely noticed.

My coup d’essai grows long: just one more example. A politician demands “clean energy” of the industrial giants; and the electorate, being almost totally ignorant of how power gets to wall sockets, picks up the chant. He vows to take General Electric, Exxon Mobile, and the others to the woodshed if elected; and indeed, shortly after victory, he withdraws with the bad boys to a tightly sealed space. The energy-producers emerge gushing public penitence and love of Mother Nature on television commercials, and the politician has a new bulge in his pocket. In their suits of sackcloth, the corporations fling themselves into the creation of windmills and solar panels—with plenty of tax-funded incentives, grants, and deductions to ease the transition. The politician sees that certain districts associated with producing these dream-dynamos enjoy an employment boom… and the hefty profits of the corporations, in turn, translate into a steady trickle purling into his campaign coffers. The public sees windmills and, like Don Quixote, supposes that a magician is at work and has solved the energy crisis. It does not see the cancer villages in Africa and Southeast Asia that supply rare-earth elements for the solar panels… but then, it doesn’t need to see those, and the complicit news media ensure invisibility.

By the way, the news media are never part of the Dark Elite; few of their captains, I venture to say, so much as penetrate its outer circle. Their contribution to the effort is gratis. They are useful idiots, perhaps more likely to end up getting shot than anyone else, eventually—but lubricating the spread of a totalitarian “progress”, in the meantime, with the adolescent utopian drivel of a coddled social class.