META NAME="description" CONTENT="response to an expression of pessimism about climate change, fascism, and fear, politics; this description was in an email for a left-wing magazine fund raiser ">

        Culture and Religion

A world view where the guide for society is based on human nature,
 not on ancient scriptures.  Home  or Topic Groups


Mad World

I recently received the following view in an email seeking a contribution to a left-wing political magazine.

    "A fascist sits in the White House. Fascism is on the march all over the world, while the Earth gets warmer and warmer, and the water rises higher and higher. Can you feel it? Doesn't it feel like it could all come crashing down at any moment? Oceans and forests are dying; meaningful political discourse is already dead. The remains of our former selves stare back at us from pictures of a time lost to history. Today, we face existential threats at every turn as we cry out in a cold, lonely wilderness wondering if the whole world has gone mad."

I can't see the world described like this. Maybe I am optimistic while this view is pessimistic. However I feel there is more to this contrast in views.
The world is not mad though our society is probably allowing it  (through inaction) to devolve in that direction.

I dread making a judgment on the " cold, lonely wilderness" reference. I am probably biased by my urban rearing with its complex  social layers of family, community, work group, social or support group, church, recreational sport team,  etc. Even social media by its design allows rather impersonal interactions with friends or strangers; If a person is still lonely in this context then either a) the social networks are either ignored or taken for granted or b) perhaps this person does not follow one's innate social nature to interact with others. There are several billion people on this planet. Even a pessimist could find a friend.

Of course our president is a problem. Even his secretary of state called him a moron.
Our system of governance has disintegrated into a kekistocracy.

We just got over Obama who had continued the pitiful policies of Bush (who was elected by his  Bush bloodline and brought with him a staff of neocons pushing PNAC).  Trump is a reflection of all the garbage beneath him in this government. Apparently nearly every possible candidate to any office has a history of corruption and immorality, even incompetence.
It is silly to expect at this point the next president or his staff will be much different.  As observed long ago, a democracy gets the government the country deserves.
However Bernie Sanders seems to  have awakened many to the possibility for change like universal health care. Ralph Nader had also tried but failed. The black lives matter movement is also encouraging.  It is too early to give up hope for change as long as one notes the path to success will require activists outside of the 3 branches of our disabled  government.

As long as we continue to work with family and community and non-violent social activists the world might remain difficult but not mad. Our social connections  can help maintain a sense of reason, not madness. If we have high expectations for our government in its current form we are doomed for disappointment unless activists provide some accountability.

The earth is not getting warmer and warmer. There might be some slight warming in the last 150 years but much/most of the real warming was from the hot 1930's (over 60 years ago)  before the recent industrialization phase began.

The perception of "warmer and warmer" is the emphasis from the media, not reality. The gatekeepers of the archive of temperature data sets periodically release a new set. The change between versions is consistent: the older records are made cooler while the recent records are made warmer. A climate scientist made this observation: the adjustments match the final rate of warming. This current behavior of such bad science has been called the Adjustocene period. With this manipulation of data the alarmists make the claim of warmer and warmer based on those published reports using adjusted data  even though the "raw" temperature data do not support that claim.
The Pacific El Nino oscillation continues to alternate between warm and cool cycles  and that effect is seen in global weather patterns but ENSO is not handled by global climate models (models are designed for a prediction not for the science underlying climate or weather). The hysterical media portray nearly every weather event as catastrophic but this is blatant fear mongering not justified by reality. We are told to fear every turn in the weather.

The oceans have apparently warmed a little since the little ice age of the early 1800's releasing much carbon dioxide from suspension over this time. Since human activity contributes so very little (only 3 %) CO2 compared to sources in nature; a historical graph of CO2 levels shows no sign of a human contribution. Crippling the world's energy production (one goal of the green movement) will not cause cooler weather, but it would contribute to energy poverty.

The oceans have been rising very slowly and steadily for many years according to published reports; nearly all of this rise is from subsistence of the land not from the ocean. This reported rise totally depends on where you are in the world. For example some Pacific islands show no change in sea level even though predicted dates of going under water have passed long ago.

Forests are not dying but instead the earth's flora are now flourishing with more carbon dioxide.

Claims of the oceans dying are typically based on worthless climate models designed to generate a prediction for ludicrously high temperatures in the distant future, like the year 2100. An academic study based on this intentionally bad prediction should also be considered invalid. However now many papers  just mention "climate change" to improve the chances for publication even with no connection.
"Climate change" funds research and careers for so many so it is a gravy train not to be derailed.

Global warming alarmism  is an effective political tool, to separate (divide and conquer) those tolerant of naturally variable weather from those wanting government intrusion.
If the oceans are claimed to be dying due to uncontained oil spills or uncontained nuclear waste or plastic waste or some other pollution then these should be solvable problems (by developing the appropriate containment with the perpetrator bearing at least some of the financial responsibility). If the claim about an ocean dying is based on misleading climate models then the fear mongering should be ignored.

Both polar ice caps continue to increase or decrease in extent each year despite alarming predictions of a collapse of the ice cap by some future date but that year passes and the ice remains so another year in the future is in the next alarm. Claims of permanent drought are always followed by rain eventually; weather is always changing, just like climate (an average of weather) is always changing. Changing weather patterns require adaptation or preparation, not hysteria. Humans have adapted to living in the arctic, in a desert, in a forest, in a tropical jungle, in a swamp, on a remote island in the ocean, high atop a mountain range, beside a frequently flooding river or coast. Is it rational to fear the natural chaos on this planet, no matter when the weather turns?
Fear of the weather should be overcome by reason, or is this fear a sign of madness?

Alarmists also make the bogus claims of consensus or settled science. Climategate (2009) revealed the cabal that enforces the dogma; legitimate science is rarely found underlying alarmist claims. Debates rarely occur because alarmists have only claims while a skeptic has the facts and science.

As far as meaningful political discourse being dead I totally agree. Our representatives follow the wishes of their financial supporters, never their voters. Political discourse involves resolving the conflicts between the interests of the two: the money or the voters. The Supreme Court so much as ruled that money should win. This ruling was not an exercise of checks and balances but of collusion.

Americans must take to heart the words of our Declaration of Independence such as: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

We live in a plutocracy, not a democracy and yet we still give  our consent to this decrepit system . The new world order is a world government and the UN or UN IPCC are not in our interests.
In this context, Americans and the rest of the world live in fear (or terror) after the events of 911 including the horrific controlled demolitions of 3 tall buildings were used to justify America's global war of terror. Everyone should remember ISIS  is a creation of America with the purpose of regime change in Syria. Despite that fact ISIS remains part of our culture of fear nurtured by the media, as if ISIS were a lurking threat to America  to be feared at every turn. Is the world mad when we know the perpetrators?

Is fascism on the rise simply because America overthrows those regimes seeking social justice or land reform? After that upheaval a military dictatorship will follow. This script was followed many times. I assume most people are aware of the many times America's leaders clearly indicate  a desire for regime change in another country and then execute it (see here).

The world is not mad but humanity has allowed our society  to neglect the necessary  mechanisms for checks/balances or for accountability; they have effectively disappeared. Absolute power corrupts absolutely ; I believe nearly every adult in every culture knows this facet of human nature yet a state of no accountability is allowed to persist. Even a mature child or teen can probably grasp the immoral motivation in a bully. This perceived world of madness is a reflection of our society's tolerance of outrageous corruption.
Fascism involves suppression of dissent but the American culture still recognizes the importance of some dissent (like this). When America completes (in progress) its transition to a world described in the book 1984, of no dissent, then a transition back to a democracy to establish a just society will be daunting. Public activism remains the only available  mechanism for attempting a credible change in accountability. Public demonstrations had been effective in earlier generations but now the media are firmly subservient to those in power.

Political change will require determination (through distractions) and innovation (to solve obstacles). When people work together as a team the melding of ideas could find a common goal and the path to get it;  focus and unity are critical for success.  The abuse of our right to assemble hampers a groundswell to develop making the task more difficult.
Since our current system lacks social justice that must be addressed in any proposal for reform.

Date created  12/01/2018
last changed 12/01/2018
Here is the list of topics in this Future Topic Group.
All Topic Groups are available by selecting More TG.
All topics in the site are in the Site Map, where each Topic Group has its topics indented below it.

Ctrl + for zoom in;  Ctrl - for zoom out ;  Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit;  pinch for zoom change;  pinched for no zoom