What's the difference between using "climate change" to institute socialism and using climate change to institute "market" policies? Both are top down. And both imply a heavy state bureaucracy.
...
...
In fact, a major argument of green alarmism in the 60s and 70s was the 'tragedy of the commons', which argued for the abolition of all common property (and the regulation of human fertility).
That argument remains in policies such as cap and trade. Aka rent-seeking.
Green leftoids later simply inverted the idea, to argue for the abolition of private property.
What this shows is that both left and right use the 'environment' to hide political ideas.
Green leftoids later simply inverted the idea, to argue for the abolition of private property.
What this shows is that both left and right use the 'environment' to hide political ideas.
An argument for seemingly market-based policies, just as for socialist ideas, should stand or fall on its own merits. Alarmism is cover for exhausted political arguments.
We should be as suspicious of green 'capitalists' as we are of green 'socialists'.
Scare-quotes, because under the cover of 'green', we don't know what they really are.
Scare-quotes, because under the cover of 'green', we don't know what they really are.
