Like James Delingpole, I’m finding it hard to keep up with Climategate, the latest posting by this Climategating journo-blogger, after another tumultuous weekend of Climategatery, being a piece he put up on Saturday about the Beano. Read EU Referendum, read the Bishop, Climate Audit, WUWT, and the rest of them. In particular, the sheer quantity of good stuff that EU Referendum puts up every day amazes me.
In one of his more recent postings, EU Referendum’s Richard North says this:
… there is a long way to go before the institutional inertia supporting the global warming industry can be overturned, and the lack of political engagement by the Conservatives is a major handicap. Until and unless this issue goes political, there is little to sustain it in the long run. Without that political traction, skeptics will find it hard to keep up the momentum, feeding fresh stories to the media. The campaign could falter.
I don’t believe the campaign will falter for a moment, any more than that old habit we used to have of complaining about the uselessness of Communism ever stopped, just because the newspapers had been ignoring that fact for a week or two. But, I get the point. Yes, the “campaign”, in the sense of daily old and new media Warmist catastrophes and surrenders and humiliations and measured retreats that turn into routs, might soon slacken off bit. And a few words of doubt about Warmism from David Cameron would indeed keep the media pot boiling that little bit longer. But how to contrive this? Cameron’s plan for the next general election is to present himself as Mister In-Between, neither Left nor Right, but Nice and Good and Wise, and thereby to make a nonsense of all Leftist protestations to the effect that he is a nasty Rightist. The more the Right complains about him, the more it suits Cameron’s plan. His plan may be unprincipled hogwash, but that’s another whole argument. Meanwhile, that is his plan.
It thus follows that the way to get an anti-Warmist response out of the Cameron is not for the Conservative Party’s entire activist base to bombard him with anti-Warmist complaints. Cameron believes he has all his faithful votes in the bag. He frets now only about the unfaithful ones. He will merely use his refusal to notice complaints from his own angry supporters to burnish his image as Mr Not-Right. No, the trick is somehow to get the Left to say anti-Warmist things. If that happens, Cameron will be echoing it within the hour.
And the good news is, the Left is starting to do this. The newspapers of the Right are now all over Global Warming, printing their usual newspaper mixture of important truths, sloppy lies, stupid irrelevancies, and generally echoing the anti-Warmist blogosphere of about a month ago or more. But, quite often, they are even acknowledging that bloggers got there first. And now they are catching up. The Guardian is starting seriously to shift. Even the BBC is starting to ask some of the questions that matter.
The reason this is happening is that when the regular non-Left newspapers publish stories about Warmism and about the dishonesties of the Warmists, people read them. Public opinion is inexorably shifting on this. Why wouldn’t it? Had it been uncontested, Warmism would have spread – still might spread – ruin all over the planet, and at a time when ruin of other kinds has just been spread all over the planet on the basis of other excuses. What’s not to hate? The arguments are extremely complicated, but the basic message now being learned from them is cruelly simple. It’s bollocks. This is a meme that can spread from one head to another head in under a second. The opinions polls can only go on going one way on this. By and by, the Left that hasn’t noticed this already will notice. Even if their only complaint is that Warmism isn’t working any more, and is instead hated, well, that’s a good reason for them to hate it too. Perhaps Warmism’s ultimate crime in their eyes will be that it is now making them look like fools.
And guess what they will then say? My guess is, they will say (see above) that Warmism is a capitalist plot. As opposed to global warming, I mean. This is how the Left always ends up accepting that something that their enemies have denounced for years as bad actually is bad. They say, it’s bad because capitalism did it. That they actually started it themselves, well, they forget that bit. But, in a way, they’re correct about this. Leftist causes do have a habit of degenerating into capitalist rackets. Certainly Warmism has become a capitalist racket, big time.
“Capitalism”, in an argumentative context such as this, is a word that blurs the distinction between (a) good and just and freedom-enhancing rules that result in, among many other splendid things, capitalists doing very well, and (b) capitalists who have done very well buying up the government and bending it to their will. We here unswervingly support (a), while remaining suspicious of (b), for all that, as we constantly also point out, (b) is at least better than (c) utter ruin, caused by people who hate both (a) and (b). For most Lefties, the dubiousness of (b) is iused as an excuse to destroy (a), which is stupid, but there you go. If that’s what it will take to make them enjoy performing the intellectual about-turn that I am suggesting for them, away from their idiotic and hitherto wholly uncritical fixation with Warmism, well, so be it. It would also help if by then the Left had found some plausible but quite different excuses for ruining up the world in their preferred manner. Again, different argument.
If anybody else in the world is doing more than Richard North to offer the Left the sort facts it needs to change its tune in the manner I describe, then I have not noticed such a person, although the Left won’t thank him for this. It will suddenly pluck such facts out of thin air, as if nobody had ever thought of them before, and denounce Right wingers for none of them having realised any of this. They will. Just you wait.
Which is when Cameron may finally have something to say about the imperfections of Warmist scientists.
It goes like this: specialist skeptic blogs, unspecialist but skeptic blogs, the Conservative Party’s usual supporters, public, non-lefty old media, more public, lefty old media, more public, and finally, last of all, David Cameron. This undignified process is presumably what David Cameron thinks of as leadership. It may end up being branded by the rest of us something seriously other than leadership, but, like I say, different argument. My point is, given Richard North’s question, that has been my answer.