Posted on 06/19/2006 10:13:56 PM PDT by goldstategop
Observers of contemporary society will surely have noted that a liberal is far more likely to fear global warming than a conservative. Why is this? After all, if the science is as conclusive as Al Gore, Time, Newsweek, The New York Times and virtually every other spokesman of the Left says it is, conservatives are just as likely to be scorched and drowned and otherwise done in by global warming as liberals will. So why aren't non-leftists nearly as exercised as leftists are? Do conservatives handle heat better? Are libertarians better swimmers? Do religious people love their children less?
The usual liberal responses -- to label a conservative position racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic or the like -- obviously don't apply here. So, liberals would have to fall back on the one remaining all-purpose liberal explanation: "big business." They might therefore explain the conservative-liberal divide over global warming thus: Conservatives don't care about global warming because they prefer corporate profits to saving the planet.
But such an explanation could not explain the vast majority of conservatives who are not in any way tied into the corporate world (like this writer, who has no stocks and who, moreover, regards big business as amoral as leftists do).
No, the usual liberal dismissals of conservatives and their positions just don't explain this particularly illuminating difference between liberals and conservatives.
Here are six more likely explanations:
-- The Left is prone to hysteria. The belief that global warming will destroy the world is but one of many hysterical notions held on the Left. As noted in a previous column devoted to the Left and hysteria, many on the Left have been hysterical about the dangers of the PATRIOT Act and the NSA surveillance of phone numbers (incipient fascism); secondhand smoke (killing vast numbers of people); drilling in the remotest area of Alaska (major environmental despoliation); and opposition to same-sex marriage (imminent Christian theocracy).
-- The Left believes that if The New York Times and other liberal news sources report something, it is true. If the cover of Time magazine says, "Global Warming: Be Worried, Very Worried," liberals get worried, very worried, about global warming.
It is noteworthy that liberals, one of whose mottos is "question authority," so rarely question the authority of the mainstream media. Now, of course, conservatives, too, often believe mainstream media. But conservatives have other sources of news that enable them to achieve the liberal ideal of questioning authority. Whereas few liberals ever read non-liberal sources of information or listen to conservative talk radio, the great majority of conservatives are regularly exposed to liberal news, liberal editorials and liberal films, and they have also received many years of liberal education.
-- The Left believes in experts. Of course, every rational person, liberal or conservative, trusts the expertise of experts -- such as when experts in biology explain the workings of mitochondria, or when experts in astronomy describe the moons of Jupiter. But for liberals, "expert" has come to mean far more than greater knowledge in a given area. It now means two additional things: One is that non-experts should defer to experts not only on matters of knowledge, but on matters of policy, as well. The second is that experts possess greater wisdom about life, not merely greater knowledge in their area of expertise.
That is why liberals are far more likely to be impressed when a Nobel Prize winner in, let us say, physics signs an ad against war or against capital punishment. The liberal is bowled over by the title "Nobel laureate." The conservative is more likely to wonder why a Nobel laureate in physics has anything more meaningful to say about war than, let us say, a taxi driver.
-- People who don't confront the greatest evils will confront far lesser ones. Most humans know the world is morally disordered -- and socially conscious humans therefore try to fight what they deem to be most responsible for that disorder. The Right tends to fight human evil such as communism and Islamic totalitarianism. The Left avoids confronting such evils and concentrates its attention instead on socioeconomic inequality, environmental problems and capitalism. Global warming meets all three of these criteria of evil. By burning fossil fuels, rich countries pollute more, the environment is being despoiled and big business increases its profits.
-- The Left is far more likely to revere, even worship, nature. A threat to the environment is regarded by many on the Left as a threat to what is most sacred to them, and therefore deemed to be the greatest threat humanity faces. The cover of Vanity Fair's recent "Special Green Issue" declared: "A Graver Threat Than Terrorism:
Global Warming." Conservatives, more concerned with human evil, hold the very opposite view: Islamic terror is a far graver threat than global warming.
-- Leftists tend to fear dying more. That is one reason they are more exercised about our waging war against evil than about the evils committed by those we fight. The number of Iraqis and others Saddam Hussein murdered troubles the Left considerably less than even the remote possibility than they may one day die of global warming (or secondhand smoke).
One day, our grandchildren may ask us what we did when Islamic fascism threatened the free world. Some of us will say we were preoccupied with fighting that threat wherever possible; others will be able to say they fought carbon dioxide emissions. One of us will look bad.
That's good to hear--but just because it's affecting you personally doesn't mean it's the reality of the situation. Suburbs are suburbs; rural is rural.
And ... like a typical liberal, she blamed you for what was her own personal responsibility. You did not make her "feel bad" ... you simply told her your opinions of her opinions. The decision to feel bad was hers and hers alone. Ergo, you are not responsible for her getting drunk and getting a DUI, she is.
It is certainly true that the liberal and conservative notions of blame are very different. We ask, "Who did this bad thing, and were there extenuating circumstances?" Liberals ask, "Which conservative shall we try to slime today?" We look at the facts, they run their fingers down their list of enemies.
In this case, though, I don't think that she really blamed me for the DUI, and blaming Republicans would have been a stretch for even the ditziest liberal. Which she was not.
While she was not a close friend, in the end she was still a friend, and I don't like seeing my friends hurt. The event reminded me to pay more attention to the effect of my words.
There in lies the difference. You are mature enough to care.
Bump.
from June.
Yep! Reading graphs and understanding airline delays due to 2 ft. of snow in Colorado!
On another thread about Global Warming one poster predicted that there would be 2 ft. of snow within in the next few days ... I wish I could locate that thread!
Yeah, but here's what I got in my email this morning (owners of Park City's resort are uber-libs and donated to Howard Dean). I guess there won't be any more snow in the mountains:
Park City Mountain Resort Studies Effects of Global Warming
Park City Mountain Resort, its parent Powdr Corporation, and KPCW radio will present the results of the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of global warming's potential effect on Park City Mountain Resort and the Utah snow sports industry at 6 p.m. tonight at the Eccles Center for the Performing Arts in Park City. Scientists at Stratus Consulting and the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder, have projected what the snow pack will look like at Park City Mountain Resort in the years 2030, 2075 and beyond.
"I was shocked when I heard the results of this study for the first time," said John Cumming, CEO of Powdr Corp. "Bottom line, if global warming continues at its current rate, it will mean the end of snow sports and our business as we know it. However, as the study shows, there is still a window of opportunity for all of us to help save our snow, but we - and our political leaders - need to take decisive action now."
Key funding for the $60,000 Save Our Snow study was provided by Park City Mountain Resort, Powdr Corporation and KPCW radio. Additional funding was provided by Deer Valley, The Canyons and the Summit County Recreation, Parks and Arts Tax.
But you'll have to convert to "Antism".
I would like a piece of that $60,000 ... actually I would like to do a study that would cost them $1 million. Charge these idiots more and the more factual the bogus results become.
GORE VA. TERMITES
TERMITES ARE WORSE FOR THE PLANET THAN MAN EVER CAN BE
"...all the talk of "global warming" is global baloney."
Of course, it's baloney. That's why we're still in the ice age and glaciers still cover half of North America. /s
Just make sure no one finds the location of our secret global warming machine.
THOU SHALT NOT QUESTION THE GOSPEL OF ST. GORE...
ALGORE AKHBAR!!
Don't you realize that the Atheist Rapture is upon us, and the only hope is to accept Socialism as our Lord and Dictator?
All non-believers are heretics, and shall be denounced, purged, and decertified.
Let the Inquisition begin!
Damn straight! We can't very well have anyone who disagrees around here.
Gangus Khan, we need you to come back and strike a blow at the heart of Islam! How would the libs handle that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.