The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) / by bennypeiser
The open anti-democratic and pro-authoritarian stance of the climatistas is becoming increasingly evident.
As I’ve been pointing our for more than a decade, the most ominous contradiction of the environmental left these days is the way in which they champion the rights of nature while going along with the rest of the left in denying human nature, let alone the natural rights of humans—which is the central premise of democratic self-government. The result, as I have been warning, is the increasingly open anti-democratic and pro-authoritarian stance of the climatistas.
For example, back in 2009 I noted the work of an Australian philosopher who wrote that “When the chips are down I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it.” (And there are more such statements at the link.)
If electoral democracy is inadequate to the task of addressing climate change, and the task is the most urgent one humanity faces, then other kinds of politics are urgently needed. The most radical alternative of all would be to consider moving beyond democracy altogether. The authoritarian Chinese system has some advantages when it comes to addressing climate change: One-party rule means freedom from electoral cycles and less need for public consultation. Technocratic solutions that put power in the hands of unelected experts could take key decisions out of the hands of voters.
I’d almost think this was a parody if I didn’t know better. Check Woodrow Wilson’s grave to see if his ghost has escaped.