The shady emails from members of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) notwithstanding, the world is pressing on to establish yet another means of transferring the wealth of industrial nations to developing countries. Europe and the United States are not only not objecting to this ploy, they're actively supporting it. President Obama is talking about $10 billion in aid to developing nations so that they can join the ranks of CO2 producers and, who knows, perhaps send some of America's money back to us?
The whole climate change industry has always seemed shaky to me, not because I don't think the planet is heating up. It well may be, just as it has done in cycles ever since the first day of creation. My concern is political and moral.
It's not hard to see a certain philosophical agenda at work in all this, one which insists that the transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor is among the highest of political ideals - the greatest good for the greatest number. Money purchases power, as we see all too frequently in our own politics. And where money is involved between nations, regulatory agencies must be established, requiring nations to submit to what is becoming a de facto world government - the continuing proliferation of treaties, protocols, and statutes binding all nations to this or that obligation.
But economics is just the way in. What moral requirements - one child per family? "non-discriminatory" hiring practices? eminent domain? - will follow once the nations of the world have learned to agree on how to move the money around?
Next they'll be wanting to build a tower to heaven in order to make a name for themselves.
T. M. Moore