Global warming activists enthuse about the LA Times’ policy of restricting debate


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Leftwing tolerance: Global warming activists enthuse about the LA Times’ policy of restricting debate.

The campaign is to get media outlets to agree to refuse to publish any letter or op-ed by anyone who expresses skepticism about human caused global warming. In other words, their response to any disagreement is simply to say, “Shut up!”

Share

10 comments

  • Cotour

    This is an example of a direct feed back system that indicates to the people who are causing pollution and “global warming” that it is time to think in longer rather than shorter terms. If they fail to recognize what they must do then in time they will suffer for their inaction and perish. The Darwin award comes to mind, the failure or inability to recognize when change must be enacted is essential to basic survival. Intellectually ignore it at your own peril.

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/latest-china-smog-emergency-shuts-city-11-million-055104682.html

  • Jwing

    Print newspapers are dying due to overwhelming losses in subscription and circulation as the old media is replaced. We are seeing the last scene in the last act of their agenda play out. Their true ideology has no reason to be hidden as their last gasps reveal the utter contempt for traditional American values of Judeo-Christian and the Constitution of our Republic,

  • Cotour

    Yes, contempt for where we came from and you could argue a lack of objective understanding of human nature. And yet I believe that we need the two sides to clash and be at war in order for there to ultimately be a healthy, continuing outcome. Its a bit counter intuitive but if there was just one point of view, or a “winner”, in control of power then there would be a black or white perverted system / world which would be either ultra Nazi izm or there would be the results of unbridled capitalism, both being oppressive and forms of slavery.

    So the only thing to do is? Battle on, because there is no attainable “Utopia”, there is only the on going process. The kind of process being the most important thing, not where you find yourself.

    The best process?

    The Constitution.

    What we are going through right now is exactly what the Constitution is designed for.

  • Jwing

    Yes…stay true to the Constitution….especially to Article V. Read Mark Levin’s new book, “The Liberty Amendments” and it is obvious that the founders left us with a way to non-violently redress the exact situation this country presently finds itself in.

    Article V sets forth the two processes for amending the Constitution, the second of which is as written in the Constitution:

  • Jwing

    Article V:

  • Edward

    Cotour,

    At least you understand that fascism (or as you called it: Nazi-ism) is a left-wing concept and that it is far from capitalism , but you failed to understand that capitalism is the opposite of slavery. It is the freedom to start your own business, to choose your employer, or to choose to retire on your savings. It is all about individual freedom and freedoms of groups of individuals who freely choose to associate with each other.

    Indeed, slavery is so contrary to capitalism that the only country to go to war to free slaves was a capitalist country – the most unbridled capitalist country ever. It would be nice if we were that free now, as freedom and prosperity thrive under capitalism in ways unlike any other system that has ever existed.

    But unfortunately we live under the thumb of a government that tells us what to do and buy, overregulates our companies (into virtual oblivion), and intimidates us into silence. Wait – those actions fit the very definition of fascism: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism?s=t

  • Cotour

    Edward, we butt heads again.

    Unbridled capitalism, meaning without “proper” governmental regulation is no different than the slavery of the Nazi, socialist, communist or plantation owner. The method may differ but the end result is exactly the same, abuse of power and exploitation.

    Capitalism is not something that is by nature a “good” thing, to assume so is to see it in too subjective a way. It is neither good nor bad, just like a gun is an inanimate object and how it is used determines whether it is good or bad. You can defend yourself or your family with it or you can rob a bank and shoot a guard with it. Its what you consciously choose to do with it that counts.

    Why is America “great”?

    Because we have a system of governance, contract law and jurisprudence that is seen to be at its core fair, just and balanced. If the law becomes perverted than maybe its not so fair or just. Its what you consciously choose to do with it that counts.

  • Edward

    Yes, we meet again. However, we may be in violent agreement this time.

    May I please point out that robbing a bank or shooting a guard are NOT capitalism. Capitalism IS working within the law to start and operate companies that could not have been created without the accumulation of money (capital), from other sources, that could not be accumulated by one individual. It is the freedom of coming together and cooperating as a group in order to accomplish what could not otherwise be done. As with everything else, one could use capitalism for ill, such as to create criminal organizations (the accumulation would be done lawfully, but the application not so lawful – capitalist companies break laws often, sometimes knowingly but most times inadvertently), so you are right that it is not “by nature” a good thing. Nothing is. For example: a knife could be used to prepare dinner or to kill (rather than shoot) a security guard.

    You seem to have confused capitalism with free markets. They often go together, and work with great synergy together. It is easy to confuse the one for the other or to think that they are the same thing.

    Free markets operated in an anarchical society would trend toward monopolies, which would damage the freedom part of free markets.

    But at least you recognize, unlike most people, that fascism is a left wing concept. I think that people have confused it with the right wing because the (farther left wing) communists did not like the fascists, because they thought them too far to the right.

    “Why is America ‘Great’”?

    It is because We the People have the freedom (yes, by law) to do great things. That is part of the free market system. Because our laws have been stable enough and enforced equally enough for us to know which things we can do and which we cannot. It is because we have not lived in a nation so corrupt that it would cost too much to do those great things.

    We are not great or exceptional because we are better than everyone else – we ARE everyone else, having come from all over the world.

    America is great because we have the freedom to do the great things that WE want to do. Unlike tyrannies or communist/socialist/fascist countries, we are not limited to doing only the things that the government wants done. This allows us to find and provide the goods and services that our fellow countrymen need or want – enough to pay us to provide them. Sometimes we consciously choose to want great things.

  • Cotour

    ” It is neither good nor bad, just like a gun is an inanimate object and how it is used determines whether it is good or bad.”

    I would like to make some simple corrections:

    *The gun is neither good nor bad.

    *Capitalism is a scheme of commerce and is not intrinsically good nor bad.

    *The Constitution is a scheme of governance and is not intrinsically good nor bad.

    *Human beings will abuse power as it relates to both of the above if there are no constraints employed to counter balance their nature.

  • Edward

    Check.

    Check.

    Check.

    And check.

    I hate it when I get into arguments of violent agreement.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *