I’ll try to be brief.
Despite internet “algorithms” that try to channel me to people who agree with me, assuming my dopamine levels will be higher with agreeable people than with disagreeable people, and that I can be herded into compartments like sheep, (or perhaps like paramecium in a Petre dish), I do not go to the sites that appear on my screen without my asking, but rather I seek disagreeable people. If I wanted agreement I’d talk to a mirror, or an echo. Instead, I seek differing views. I was brought up to think this was the way to be broad minded.
Of course, this allows me to travel to the sites of amazingly disagreeable people. They are so nasty, in some cases, that I bite my tongue and lurk around the periphery of their sites. Occasionally I become so curious I ask questions, in a most ingratiating and apologetic manner, as an obvious fool before the obviously wise, and even then, I can find my head served to me on a platter. How dare I even question?
It becomes obvious that such people, unlike me, have no interest in differing views. They so prefer the dopamine rush of agreement that they become like parrots in an echo chamber.
This can be a sad state of affairs if what they agree upon is in some ways an incorrect concept. What they do not see may be a waterfall in the river they drift lazily upon, but you are frowned upon for disturbing their peace and pointing out the waterfall ahead.
This is especially disagreeable when these agreeing people are themselves creating the waterfall they are about to tumble over.
This exactly describes the situation of Global Warming Alarmists, who have created a situation where many may freeze and starve.
I’ve been involved in discussions with Alarmists on the web for twenty years now, and I’d say the Alarmists were of two types. One type enjoyed differing opinions, and both asked and answered questions, and another type did everything possible to prevent questions being asked, even censoring, shadow-banning, and “cancelling” people who dared question.
With the first sort of Alarmist, discussions ranged far and wide, discussing all sorts of nuances of what was right and what might go wrong, fearlessly talking about what resorting to nuclear fuel might look like, what a total ban of fossil fuels might involve, and what sticking with fossil fuels might involve as well. With the second sort of Alarmist no discussion was possible. It was, “My way or the highway.”
The open-minded Alarmists could discuss big problems which would arise if fossil fuels were banned, not only involving gas, heating oil and electricity, but the very fertilizer that grows the crops which feed us. However, the echo-chamber Alarmists simply clung to the idea quitting fossil fuels would mysteriously solve all problems.
Unfortunately, the administration of Fraudulant Biden has chosen the echo-chamber Alarmist idea, and we are seeing energy prices leap and both fuel and food prices soar. The open-minded Alarmist could have told him so, but now they are the ones censored, shadow-banned and cancelled, to their own astonishment.
This brings me to another group of disagreeable people I, in my curiosity about differing views, have visited, quietly lurking about the perfidy of their sites. These are the wealthy people I grew up midst, the “Elite”. And the haughtiest of these people tend to exude a scorn towards any who disagree, as if any who disagree are “deniers”, are mere “rabble”, and that “the rabble does not know what is good for them.”
These people are most disagreeable not when it comes to the topic of Global Warming, but rather when it comes to the topic of population. They do not feel God populated the planet for reasons God only knows, but that the current population is a threat, which they call “overpopulation”, and that what they call “depopulation” would be “for the good.”
Personally, I feel the more the merrier, and wonder what it is they are threatened by. Are they afraid they will have to share? Lose some acres of their estates? If they would be honest about their fear, about their cowardice, we could seek to reassure them, and propose remedies.
Instead, they seem steadfast in their determination to depopulate the planet, “for our own good.”
For example, Russia and Ukraine were on the verge of a peace agreement last spring, but the Elite poured money into keeping a horrible war going. Why? I suppose it was good for the Elite. It certainly wasn’t good for humanity. The world will have far less food and energy because the war was continued. It is not merely Europe that faces cold and hunger this winter. But, if Russia is crushed, the Elite of the European Union think they will “win”.
Such a victory would ordinarily be called a Pyrrhic victory, because the losses so obviously outweigh the gains. As Ukraine pounds the Russians and regains its homeland it regains lands its artillery shattered. Once productive villages are rubble. How can they get back to feeding the rest of us? They can’t.
This is quite OK with some of the Elite, for they believe the rest of us don’t know what is good for us. And what is good for us? Depopulation. In other words, we are supposed to be good sports about freezing and starving. It is for the good of the planet we roll over and die.
I, and a great many others, beg to differ. We refuse to roll over and die. Rather we will feed the hungry, clothe the naked, cut firewood for the cold, shelter the homeless, and, if depopulation must be an issue, we will demand the Elite set the example, and roll over and die.
Sunrise's Swansong 