Gullible eager-beaver planet savers

‘The environment’ is the most ingenious cover story ever devised for Big Government

by Mark Steyn on Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:00pm - 208 Comments

Gullible eager-beaver planet saversI’m always appreciative when a fellow says what he really means. Tim Flannery, the jet-setting doomsaying global warm-monger from down under, was in Ottawa the other day promoting his latest eco-tract, and offered a few thoughts on “Copenhagen”—which is transnational-speak for December’s UN Convention on Climate Change. “We all too often mistake the nature of those negotiations in Copenhagen,” remarked professor Flannery. “We think of them as being concerned with some sort of environmental treaty. That is far from the case. The negotiations now ongoing toward the Copenhagen agreement are in effect diplomacy at the most profound global level. They deal with every aspect of our life and they will influence every aspect of our life, our economy, our society.”

Hold that thought: “They deal with every aspect of our life.” Did you know every aspect of your life was being negotiated at Copenhagen? But in a good way! So no need to worry. After all, we all care about the environment, don’t we? So we ought to do something about it, right? And, since “the environment” isn’t just in your town or county but spreads across the entire planet, we can only really do something at the planetary level. But what to do? According to paragraph 38 on page 18 of the latest negotiating text, the convention will set up a “government” to manage the “new funds” and the “related facilitative processes.”

Tim Flannery’s disarmingly honest characterization passed almost without notice, reported as far as I can tell only by Brian Lilley of CFRB Toronto and CJAD Montreal. But professor Flannery has it right. Government transport policy is about transport, and government education policy is about education, but environmental policy is about everything, because everything’s part of “the environment”: your town, your county, your planet—and you. “We are the environment. There is no distinction,” declared another renowned expert, David Suzuki, last year. And just as the government now monitors air and water quality so it’s increasingly happy to regulate your quality.

In the name of “the environment,” the state gets to regulate everything you do. The cap-and-trade bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, for example, is a bold assault on property rights: in order to sell your home—whether built in 2006 or 1772—you would have to bring it into compliance with whimsical, eternally evolving national “energy efficiency” standards, starting with a 50 per cent reduction in energy use by 2018. Fail to do so and it would be illegal for you to enter into a private contract with a willing buyer.

Hey, but who would ever find out?

Don’t be so sure. In 2006, to comply with the “European Landfill Directive,” various municipal councils in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland introduced “smart” trash cans—“wheelie bins” with a penny-sized electronic chip embedded within that helpfully monitors and records your garbage as it’s tossed into the truck. Once upon a time, you had to be a double-0 agent with Her Majesty’s Secret Service to be able to install that level of high-tech spy gadgetry. But now any old low-level apparatchik from the municipal council can do it, all in the cause of a sustainable planet. So where’s the harm?

And once Big Brother’s in your trash can, why stop there? Our wheelie-bin sensors are detecting an awful lot of junk-food packaging in your garbage. Maybe you should be eating healthier. In Tokyo, Matsushita engineers have created a “smart toilet”: you sit down, and the seat sends a mild electric charge through your bottom that calculates your body/fat ratio, and then transmits the information to your doctors. Japan has a fast-aging population imposing unsustainable costs on its health system, so the state has an interest in tracking your looming health problems, and nipping them in the butt. In England, meanwhile, Twyford’s, whose founder invented the modern ceramic toilet in the 19th century, has developed an advanced model—the VIP (Versatile Interactive Pan)—that examines your urine and stools for medical problems and dietary content: if you’re not getting enough roughage, it automatically sends a signal to the nearest supermarket requesting a delivery of beans. All you have to do is sit there as your VIP toilet orders à la carte and prescribes your medication.

But think of the environmental benefits: readers may recall Sheryl Crow’s brief campaign to get people to use only one sheet of toilet paper (I recommended an all-star consciousness-raising single—“All we are saying is give one piece a chance”). Last month, the Washington Post reported a new front in this war. Two-ply bathroom tissue, according to Allen Hershkowitz of the Natural Resources Defense Council, “is the Hummer of the paper industry.” Oh, and blame Canada, as that’s where most American two-ply comes from: this decadent Dominion is apparently the House of Saud of toilet paper. In Britain, where closed-circuit cameras monitor you to check you’re not eating a sandwich while driving, is it such a stretch to foresee those toilet sensors that wire your stool analysis to the government health centre also snitching on your two-ply Cottonelle? Or perhaps, if it’s a Matsushita toilet, a few extra volts from the buttock-zapper will be enough of a warning.

“The environment” is the most ingenious cover story for Big Government ever devised. You float a rumour that George W. Bush is checking up on what library books you’re reading, and everyone goes bananas. But announce that a government monitoring device has been placed in every citizen’s trash can in the cause of “saving the planet,” and the world loves you.

In 1785, the British philosopher Jeremy Bentham began working on his famous “Pan-opticon”—a radial prison in which a central “inspector” could see all the prisoners, but they could never see him. In the computer age, we now have not merely panopticon buildings, but panopticon societies, like modern London—and soon perhaps, excepting a few redoubts such as Waziristan and the livelier precincts of the Horn of Africa, a panopticon planet.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://dumbolddad.blogspot.com Dedicated_Dad

    PS: IT'S THE SUN, STUPID.

    Explain why every planet in the solar-system is warming at about the same rate as Earth?

    Guess it's all those SUVs the martians are driving, huh?

    Morons and liars and dictators (Oh MY!)

    God help us…

    DD

  • Adam

    How is a 5 year average more accurate than a 10 year average?

  • Adam

    Chris O

    You keep referencing this website:

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2005/04/gwsbingo….

    To refute a lot of the arguments here. Why are you referencing a blog post written by a computer scientist in 2005? You should really find something more recent.

  • Anon Lib

    The World Government is coming! The World Government is coming! We'll be ruled by German technocrats! Quick get your long guns!!!

  • Alison Mandadi

    This article is very well-written, but I would like to see substantiation of what Setyn asserts about property rights. Congressman Courtney (CD2) specifically states on his website "As passed by the House, the [ACES] bill does not require current or future homeowners to conduct energy audits, or make energy efficiency improvements on their existing homes."__http://courtney.house.gov/cleanenergy/ __One of you has to be wrong, or else I'm missing something. Do you have a reference for your assertion??

  • CJJ

    I think your article is long on scare and short on reality. As stated by Thomas Friedman, most of the world and all of your examples are countries that are not one-party autocracies. This means Big Government cannot simply restrict and monitor our lives in the name of Green. Perhaps the only good thing your article does is incite people to take notice of the upcoming climate change talks. Let’s begin a constructive dialogue on positive change for the environment and ourselves; it doesn’t have to be so scary.

    • Adam

      Government restricts and monitors our lives in the name of security, is it really that big a stretch that they'll do it for something else?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/warrbored warrbored

    Agree with most of this article. There isn't enough critical thinking in this area. High profile egos jump on the bandwagon & enjoy the limelight. For example, do electric cars make sense- not by a long-shot. Should we be scarring our landscape with wind turbines when we have to build the equivalent gas-turbine capacity? It's all about what is fashionable, not what makes sense.

  • Carol Wainio

    Mark Steyn claims that: “In the name of ‘the environment,’ the state gets to regulate everything you do. The cap-and-trade bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, for example, is a bold assault on property rights: in order to sell your home—whether built in 2006 or 1772—you would have to bring it into compliance with whimsical, eternally evolving national ‘energy efficiency’ standards, starting with a 50 per cent reduction in energy use by 2018. Fail to do so and it would be illegal for you to enter into a private contract with a willing buyer”.

    This claim is false, and has already been debunked by Factcheck.org. From their website (June 20, 2009):

    Q: Does the House energy bill subject owners of existing homes to an energy efficiency audit before they can sell?

    A: Rep. Boehner and Rush Limbaugh got this wrong. The Realtors and home builders associations say there’s no such requirement in the bill, as do we.
    It’s true that the bill sets new national efficiency standards for new residential and commercial buildings. It calls for buildings to be 30 percent more efficient by 2012, and 50 percent more efficient beginning in 2014. It ultimately calls for buildings to be 75 percent more efficient by 2029. But those efficiency benchmarks apply only to homes constructed after the bill becomes law, not currently existing ones. We found no requirement for energy audits or energy-efficiency inspections in the bill.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2009/07/energy-bill-and-…

    Mr. Steyn’s conspiratorial claims that environmental concerns will result in world government are based on faulty information. Readers of Canada’s national newsmagazine deserve better.

  • Mimi Scott

    Is Friedman out of his mind??? “But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages."

    Reasonably enlightened?? Do reasonably enlightened leaders continue to jail dissidents, impose strict restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly, use mega-surveillance on internet use, blocking many sites, and employ a host of decidedly oppressive measures to control the population?? Also, capitalism in China means the government owns half of every enterprise, last I heard…

  • http://electronicsexpo.blogspot.com/ coolest gadgets

    I’m always appreciative when a fellow says what he really means. Tim Flannery, the jet-setting doomsaying global warm-monger from down under, was in Ottawa the other day promoting his latest eco-tract, and offered a few thoughts on “Copenhagen” — which is transnational-speak for December’s UN Convention on Climate Change. “We all too often mistake the nature of those negotiations in Copenhagen,” remarked professor Flannery. “We think of them as being concerned with some sort of environmental treaty. That is far from the case. The negotiations now ongoing toward the Copenhagen agreement are in effect diplomacy at the most profound global level. They deal with every aspect of our life and they will influence every aspect of our life, our economy, our society.”

From Macleans