With all of the hooplah about falsified evidence for anthrogenic global warming and the suppression of evidence against it, Al Gore has been silent for some time. He has, however, decided to finally grace the pages of the New York Times with his wit and wisdom. In a charming editorial, Gore talks about how the proposed cap-and-trade legislation, which will increases taxes, utility costs, reduce jobs, and generally damage an already faltering economy, is so fantastic that even in global warming weren’t a trumped up fearmongering program that wasn’t supported by actual evidence, it would still be a spiffy idea. Of course, the famously uncritical New Yorks Times hasn’t bothered to cover the whole Climategate fiasco, which provides evidence that global warming is in fact a trumped up fearmongering program that isn’t supported by actual evidence, nor has it bothered to investigate Gore’s conflict of interest, as he stands to make billions off of his carbon trading initiative. Gore’s article is handled pretty well over at Several other commentators have latched onto Gore’s article and given it thorough treatment, including Counterculture Conservative, Jillian Bandes at Townhall, and Scipio at Red State but I’m more interested in something specific that he said in it.
Jonah Goldberg at the National Review Online highlights just one verse from Gore’s paean: “From the standpoint of governance, what is at stake is our ability to use the rule of law as an instrument of human redemption.” Goldberg’s response is priceless:
Surely, a claim is in trouble when you can swap out a phrase like “from the standpoint of governance” and helpfully replace it with “from the standpoint of Glaxar: Supreme Ruler of the Known Universe” or “from the standpoint of the Hale-Bopp Cult . . .”
But let’s look at what our former Vice President has said once again.
From the standpoint of governance, what is at stake is our ability to use the rule of law as an instrument of human redemption.
This should absolutely terrify everyone who reads it.
First of all, what in the hell is the “standpoint of governance”? The Founding Fathers regarded government as a necesary evil that should be restricted as much as possible. The standpoint of government should be that of the people government serves. Yes, that government serves, not those that serve government. Gore’s position seems to presuppose that government has a position above and beyond the people,which that government appearently needs to care for and control.
The very fact that Al Gore can suggest that the rule of law can be used as an instrument of “human redemption” tells me that he has no fundamental understanding of how our government is structured, why it was created, how it is suposed to operate, and who is supposed to be in charge of it.It tells me that his goal is to use government to engineer the “redemption” of man, to establish the progressive utopia that will save us all from ourselves. It tells me that he believes that it is his job, his right, to tell all of us what’s best for us, since he is so much more elnightened, and that he is willing to use the rules of law (i.e. deadly force) to impose this upon us.
And Gore’s language is explicitly religious. This is not about science or economics. This is about perfecting humanity according to Gore’s vision. Senator Palpatine couldn’t have said it better.
This is the true goal of the AGW crowd. Do not be duped into thinking that climate change legislation has anything to do with concern with the environment. It has to do with the desire to control the lives of others and impose a faux perfection upon the common folk that are seen as too ignorant to live their own lives. It is a desire to establish a theocracy with progressivism as the central dogma, and with dissent as the utmost sin.
That this man can even be considered qualified to hold any public office is a travesty. That there are people that support and defend his positions is a greater one.