The Global Warmists are trying to sell us on the idea that Anthropogenic Global Warming is the root cause of terrorism. Preposterous, you say? Well maybe just ridiculous. But in so doing Progressives are foretelling their true nature. So says Darren Jonescu in American Thinker. Jonescu quotes U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon as declaring that neglecting Climate Change leads to fewer opportunities for Middle Eastern youth which makes them susceptible to being radicalized. So the link is that Global Warming causes joblessness and joblessness causes terrorism.
Read carefully Jonescu’s analysis of why Progressivism and Radical Islam are two branches from the same tree. This comparison is not so far-fetched and his insight into the Progressive mind is a slam dunk.
Progressivism, all its theoretical euphemisms aside, is and always has been modern tyranny’s ideological mask. In other words, it is merely rationalized power-lust. Power-lust in any form recognizes no moral rule higher than the satisfaction of its aim, no ultimate truth beyond the need to subjugate others. Men whose minds are oriented in this way are sociopaths. This makes progressivism the most advanced and organized form of sociopathy – sociopathy as politics.
Malicious lies and violent means, therefore, are to be expected from true progressives – the sociopaths of modern politics – not as anomalies or aberrations, but as essential instruments in realizing their main themes, to be used whenever local conditions present the opportunity. The chief practical difference between despotic progressivism and democratic progressivism lies in the level of sophistication required in the lying, and the degree of subtlety with which coercion may be applied or utilized. In every case, progressivism in practice means the exploitation of real or perceived crises to promote increased government authority and decreased individual liberty, to be achieved by means of lies that, if repeated often enough, should supplant reality in the collective mind. This is why progressive philosophy in all its academic forms insists on both the malleability of truth and the collectivity of thought – i.e., the rejection of reason and common sense. These are the only conditions in which their political strategy can fully succeed.
In short, he (U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon) is exploiting legitimate fears of the spread of Islamic terrorism to push the civilized world into accepting supra-national governance according to socialist (anti-property, redistributive) regulations enforceable beyond the jurisdictions of all elected governments, voting populations, and national constitutions.
For years, the warmists have attempted to promote their cause with dire warnings about impending cataclysmic results of climate change, warnings that in many cases have already passed their “best before” dates or have been retracted very quietly, so as to leave their original fear-mongering effects intact. The Himalayas are about to melt, the South Pole is about to drown the southern hemisphere, the world’s coastal cities are about to vanish, Santa Claus is stranded on an ice floe, etc.
But this newest dire warning is different. Telling us that Mother Nature is about to wipe us off the planet for our transgressions when there is no evidence to support such a claim is paternalistic propaganda, reducing all pretenses of scientific objectivity to sand. Suggesting, on the other hand, that climate change is about to unleash new beheadings, bombings, and shouts of “Allahu Akbar” at your family Christmas party is something else entirely. Put bluntly, it is an attempt to frighten people into acquiescence with promises of deadly violence.
Such a line of rhetoric is worse than mere propaganda. First of all, it promotes the fallacious “root causes” theory of terrorism, the same theory that claims that if only the West had not exploited Arab oil, if only Israel had not occupied this or that “sacred Islamic site,” there would be no Muslim extremism. It fosters the absurd notion that terrorism, in the sense currently threatening the civilized world, is just a gut reaction to personal hardship – like “going postal” – rather than a politico-religious strategy undertaken in the name of Islamic utopianism.
Even more disturbingly, however, Ban’s rhetoric indicates the depths to which “democratic” progressives are now prepared to sink to satisfy their power-lust. In his oh-so-moderate, passive-aggressive voice, the U.N. secretary-general is indirectly threatening an increase in terrorist violence if we do not allow our paternalistic betters to use their global administrative apparatus to control our economies, regulate our workplaces and homes, limit our transportation choices, circumscribe our use and disposal of our possessions, and even define the ultimate value of our lives (our “carbon footprint”). He has, in effect, co-opted the terrorists’ cause, seeking to manipulate the world’s population into submitting to a tyrannical bureaucracy by suggesting that if we fail to submit, today’s children will finally be driven by climate change to “join these foreign terrorist fighters” and kill us.
Genuine progressives – the leaders, theorists, and chief spokesmen of this pseudo-philosophy – are political sociopaths. Big lies; systematic propaganda; and, where opportune, the exploitation of violence and fear to further their ends are the basic tools of their trade. The attempt to use the hellish reality of the growing global caliphate movement to scare populations into accepting regulatory tyranny is worse than irrational, more than despicable. It is an attempt to piggyback the global warming agenda on the global caliphate agenda, literally exploiting real terror to further the ends of internationalist progressivism.
Hence, the imaginary link between global warming and terrorism is now real – a marriage of convenience between two hateful agendas. Only a sociopathic mind could dream up a scheme as revolting as this arms-length terrorism, let alone put it into practice as a coordinated, unified strategy, as the progressives have done over the past couple of weeks. Islamism thrives on the progressives’ refusal to acknowledge its religious basis. And now progressives are openly demanding that we submit to global authoritarian powers under the threat of increased terrorist violence.
The world faces two dire threats at this moment, both of which must be defeated if civilization is to continue: global Islamism and global progressivism. They are linked, and the nexus is becoming increasingly direct every day. Both threats must be fought with every weapon available. The first step is to be honest about the quasi-religious zealotry and life-destroying aims that motivate both factions, and to stop imagining we can subdue either of them with empathy, compromise, and root cause psychologizing.