Quote:
Originally Posted by TDK1044
The GW subject has always been in part about the redistribution of world wealth, by guilting the wealthy into helping the third world. I was present at a meeting 30 years ago where that very scenario was front and center.The 'science' has always been a back drop for that agenda.
|
I admit it. By your standards I'm a filthy, dirty commie who has to be hunted down in the great fight to support capitalist "liberal" democracy and the free market, God bless its (his?) soul!
While I would like to see more wealth distributed to the poorest of countries, considering that we, the West are throwing out money by the truckloads with stupid, irational activities just to support the consumerist agenda. Hobsbawm wrote in his book The Age of Extremes that consumerism has replaced ideology. Unfortunately for us he was quite right, as we are now unable to look past ourselves and our children are picked up this more and more (See the future of anarcholiberalism thread I posted some time ago).
Yet this does not mean that I, as a (future) member of the academia am willing to degrade my science in the fulfilment of any political goals I may have. I wish prosperity for everyone and changing our lifestyles, which will spend and emit less, while keeping us prosper as newer before seen in the history of men, for this is his future, one I shall see built.
Remind me some time to write a short essay on my views on transhumanism and climate change.
__________________________
Looks like we won't have to convince America with a rational debate. We'll just throw god into the mix and he'll strait everything up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8405108.stm
Quote:
|
The candidate who is able to give them one, who can straddle the divide between social conservatism and environmental activism, who can recruit God in the service of the planet, is onto a winner.
|