Whether true or false, there's obviously an agenda behind the relentless climate change alarmism we're being subjected to by our leaders both elected and un-. It's aimed at justifying a radical alteration of human consumption patterns.
Heretofore loyalty to our Establishment had proven survival value. Censorship of alternative views was self-evidently justified, coming as it did from our trusted authorities. They were honorable; they had our best interests at heart; they accordingly acquired our trust, and with it our loyalty. Those outside the fold of our beliefs (recognized by us as "the facts") were, simply, wrong - hence censorship of alternative views was not merely justified, it was a manifestation of natural order: the proof was that the social contract worked to our benefit.
But trust in government is now at an all-time low. We are coming to the uncomfortable realization that we are superfluous to the long-term goals of our leaders. We are, increasingly, no longer productive. We are becoming "useless eaters". We are polluting . There are too many of us. AI and robots are replacing us. And we are being told all this. It is not a secret! But because we depend, more than those who lead us, on the social contract, we can't afford not to trust it, or them. And so we're continuing to run on automatic, clinging to the underlying assumptions of a belief system that has served us so well. But are they still valid? Do they apply to present circumstances?
To increasing numbers of us, once-agreeable censorship of anything that contradicted the government narrative now feels oppressive, unprecedented, alien. What has changed is not censorship per se. That was always there. What has changed is that the pyramid of value intertwined with authority that justified it is unraveling. Value and authority in a healthy society are inseparable. The two are mutually supportive; the one justifies the other. We submit voluntarily to authority that supports our values. But when the two diverge, as now, and authority alone comprises the pyramid, then it ceases to be a voluntary arrangement. It becomes coercive. This signals the elimination of mutual honesty as the guiding principle of the social contract, and the censorship we once embraced becomes a very tangible imposition, a mental prison.
Loyally swallowing political rhetoric dubbed, with post-religious conviction, "the science", is no longer a good survival strategy. We have to start thinking outside the box of our beliefs.
The anthropogenic warming argument is politically driven, like everything else. This authority pyramid was once, as I say, to our apparent benefit, reflecting a value pyramid culminating in God, the source of all value as of all authority. Today its coercive political nature is hidden behind a new facade of supposed infallibility - "the science". But what are the scientific data that support the new climate agenda? If I say there's mounting expert opinion questioning it, then on what basis - what authority - are we to trust these contrarian, maverick experts over those endorsed by our government?
We urgently need to reassess our credibility criteria. "Independent fact checkers" is an oxymoron. On what basis is the source supposedly independent? Where's the funding coming from? Does the "expert" have respectable credentials? Respected by whom? On what basis do we assess the expert as honorable?
A revolution of belief is required. We have come to believe that science can be a substitute for religion; that is, that science can direct values. It can't. The situation is exactly the other way around, and when we invert the order we stand our world of values (what we affirmingly call "facts") on its head. Everything becomes its opposite. The result is a world not of truths - i.e. stuff we honestly believe to be the case, regardless of our own desires, but of propaganda - stuff we want others to believe, guided by our will to power. When propaganda replaces truth, then we're in a different political landscape, one in which ends justify means. Call it Communism; call it Fascism, but that's exactly where we are now.
Pablo
No comments:
Post a Comment