Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Ban! Mandate! Require!

Back in Mark Twain's day, as in our own, everybody used to complain about the weather. But in those long-ago days of intolerance and closed-minded bigotry, activists claiming to be able to control the weather for the low low price of... would have been tarred and feathered and laughed at as madmen or mountebanks before being run out of town.

In our more tolerant and high-tech scientific age, we have shaken off those blinders as we gradually return to the wisdom of our cave-dwelling tribal warrior ancestors. We are increasingly back in touch with the ancient mysteries of the weather gods. Indeed, the vast majority of humans and proto-humans who have ever lived would fully agree with our educated and scientifically sophisticated population that the weather is controlled by experts -- or rather, by experts who propitiate the weather spirits by ordering peasants around in ways known to please the capricious supernatural powers that direct the energies of wind, water, earth, and fire. Who are we, who have never walked a mile in his sandals, to say Neanderthal man was wrong?

Whether those gods are known as Zeus, Baal, Zephyr, Climatemodel, Mextli, or Tlaloc, we humans know in our hearts that weather is the result of, and (to those with eyes to see) a divine commentary upon, the state of our ritual cleanliness as a society. With this in mind, how can climate change not be our fault?

To that extent let us take up the sword of faith and compel the selfish bastards around us to increase their ritual cleanliness. You cannot save the earth without breaking a few eggs. Let us rid ourselves and others of the filth and shame of work, acquisition, self-ownership, and consumption, and step forward into the bright light of prehistory where to be commanded is to be loved. And let us be loved not only by those whose heavy burden it is to take from us in defence of Earth; not only by our fellow happy Edenic peasants; not only by our animal friends; but most of all by the great weather spirits whose rage we have aroused with our selfish consumption. Consider the following demand, which is much more in line with the common historical social practices that please the gods (and the experts who speak for them) much more than our own highly irregular and unprecedented so-called "freedoms":

Develop an individual- or family-based rationing system for selected carbon-intense activities like airline travel or even car travel. Rationing is a more democratic way of restricting consumption than taxation.
Restricting others' selfish desires doesn't just feel good -- it is demanded by the very survival of the planet. Let us progress together in rage against the machine. Let us ban, mandate, and require.

Mandatory energy audits for all. That would be totally super cool and awesome, like when you can fit the classes from all five of your courses into four days and get a weekday off.

12 comments:

Little Big Man said...

Mike Akbar! Mike Akbar!!

Elaine said...

Not only are the glowtardians nuts, they're creepy.
Not a word in there about population control...yet. It will be interesting to see the language they use to promote a human cull. How can you say we need to kill a whack of people to save the earth, in a politically correct warm fuzzy way.

Anonymous said...

I think the general assumption is the implosion of our economy as recommended in the plans they have outlined will remove the need for explicit population control. It is quite difficult to afford quality health care when the only 'acceptable' occupation is subsistence farming or performing energy audits.

Elaine said...

Very astute observation Anon. No economy means no tax base, no health care. Be back to every tribe for themselves. Sort of like the hamass/fatah or Toronto gangsta situation. Infant mortality will be considered a good thing. It strikes me odd that the glowtardians are screeching for gun control, they must be too stupid to realize they are going to need them to protect their patch.

Mike said...

Mike Akbar!!

"It's a trap!"

Elaine said...

The glowtardians will need gods, you would make a good god Mike.Think of the fun of making up stupid rules, and having the glowtardians bowing down at your feet. They are just itching for someone to control and monitor there every bowel movement. You could put eng/pussy peter in charge of the shithouse patrol.

John Nicklin said...

Elaine said "How can you say we need to kill a whack of people to save the earth, in a politically correct warm fuzzy way."

How's this:

We must limit energy consumption and production worldwide.

Or:

No DDT for you.

The greens have a lot of polite ways to talk about genocide. Afterall, they are just squalid little brown people living on the edge, the greens know it won't take much to push them over. Just limit them to solar or wind power, that should do it, problem solved.

Who's going to clean up the mess?

Elaine said...

John, you are so right. I was over reading the London Commons blog on this very topic, and the glowtards are arguing over this very thing. Some of the more cunning glowtards are telling the not-so-bright glowtards to shut to fuck up about the need to kill a whack of humans off to save the planet. The conniving glowtards think that is going to scare the sheeple, and they will reject the glowtardian plan to destroy the economy and bring global fascism to fruitation. Creepy bunch of bastards they are.

Elaine said...

Mercy! dammit, Walmart is going GREEN! You know what that means don't you? Longer line-ups at the till, because the glowtardian freaks will be flocking there in droves. It will stink in those long line ups because the glowtardians will only bathe in soap made of goat piss and marigolds.

I just know there is a group of people standing around a factory in China laughing their asses off saying, "round-eyes, he fucking nuts."

Peter K. said...

The two funniest things about this site but specifically Mike:

1) You don't have the courage to name the Londoncommons.net outright in your posts. you hide your references to Londoncommons.net within the most boring attempts at witty sarcasm. Why not actually use Londoncommons.net in your posts? Would it hurt you to post Londoncommons.net in your ridiculous ramblings? This lack of reference is to ensure only the people who already slither in your rich kid domain will read them. This is why your ideas will never grow.

2) You love to use peoples real names to smear their identities. You do this with such enjoyment yet you are too cowardly to give out your full names. That is by far the most cowardly act of all.

Way to go mike et al.

Peter K.

Mike said...

Peter K,

Although your input is welcome, so long as it agrees with our extremist doctrines, you are showing signs of not bellyfeeling the overall program of the London Fog. This is disturbing and confusing, because it calls into question many of the blind beliefs inculcated in us by the corporate media.

My point is that we have been receiving far too many e-teardrops from regular posters who are now too intimidated to post comments for fear of getting into a disagreeing match with you.

This is supposed to be a place where everyone can have their say, no matter who they are, within the constraints of our site's highly restrictive iron-clad dogmas. If you want to speak truth to power then please take it somewhere more open to new ideas.

You may choose to think of the Internet as a refreshable resource, but if you continue derailing threads with an obviously extreme anti-extremist agenda of anti-me bigotry, we will have to apply for an OntarioWorks grant to convene a colloquium to consider the protocol for putting together a policy about organizing the proper channels for grassroots partial revocation of your posting privileges, including and limited to forbidding you from using the Choctaw Indian and Tocharian B Unicode code points in your comments. Do not force us to add Sumerian to the list.

I hope you respect the enormous amount of red tape this would entail for us, and will refrain from derailing threads with inappropriate comments.

Peter K. said...

First of all,

That was funny.

Secondly, I respect that.

Although I am slightly confused as to how this practice would fit into your Libertarian/Freedom Party doctrine.

Nontheless, I understand.

Peter