A Shot at Libertarians Re: Global Warming

[Toro]

This post from TokyoTom deplores the fact that (TT excepted) supporters of the Austrian School, and for that matter libertarians in general, are almost universally committed to delusional views on climate science. The obvious question is why. As TT points out, there are plenty of political opportunities to use climate change to attack subsidies and other existing interventions. And the fact that the environmental movement has shifted (mostly) from profound suspicion of markets to enthusiastic support for market-based policies such as carbon taxes and cap and trade seems like a big win. Most obviously, emissions trading relies on property rights and Austrians are supposed to like property rights.

On the other hand, given the near-universal rejection of mainstream climate science, we can draw one of only three conclusions
(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”
(b) Austrians/libertarians don’t understand their own theory and falsely believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong
(c) Austrians/libertarians do understand their own theory and correctly believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

While (a) clearly has some validity, most of the comments on climate science made here by self-described Austrians and libertarians suggest that either (b) or (c) is true. But which?

John Quiggin » Libertarians and delusionism

 

[dilloduck]

This post from TokyoTom deplores the fact that (TT excepted) supporters of the Austrian School, and for that matter libertarians in general, are almost universally committed to delusional views on climate science. The obvious question is why. As TT points out, there are plenty of political opportunities to use climate change to attack subsidies and other existing interventions. And the fact that the environmental movement has shifted (mostly) from profound suspicion of markets to enthusiastic support for market-based policies such as carbon taxes and cap and trade seems like a big win. Most obviously, emissions trading relies on property rights and Austrians are supposed to like property rights.

On the other hand, given the near-universal rejection of mainstream climate science, we can draw one of only three conclusions
(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”
(b) Austrians/libertarians don’t understand their own theory and falsely believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong
(c) Austrians/libertarians do understand their own theory and correctly believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

While (a) clearly has some validity, most of the comments on climate science made here by self-described Austrians and libertarians suggest that either (b) or (c) is true. But which?

John Quiggin » Libertarians and delusionism

Is that sorta like trying to get everyone to believe something is worth something when it's not ?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

This post from TokyoTom deplores the fact that (TT excepted) supporters of the Austrian School, and for that matter libertarians in general, are almost universally committed to delusional views on climate science. The obvious question is why. As TT points out, there are plenty of political opportunities to use climate change to attack subsidies and other existing interventions. And the fact that the environmental movement has shifted (mostly) from profound suspicion of markets to enthusiastic support for market-based policies such as carbon taxes and cap and trade seems like a big win. Most obviously, emissions trading relies on property rights and Austrians are supposed to like property rights.

On the other hand, given the near-universal rejection of mainstream climate science, we can draw one of only three conclusions
(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”
(b) Austrians/libertarians don’t understand their own theory and falsely believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong
(c) Austrians/libertarians do understand their own theory and correctly believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

While (a) clearly has some validity, most of the comments on climate science made here by self-described Austrians and libertarians suggest that either (b) or (c) is true. But which?

John Quiggin » Libertarians and delusionism

Is that sorta like trying to get everyone to believe something is worth something when it's not ?

Whoever wrote that article either doesn't understand liberatarians AT ALL or I dont.

 

[Si modo]

Evidently, libertarians must not understand themselves, either, if the article is true.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

John Quiggin » Libertarians and delusionism

Is that sorta like trying to get everyone to believe something is worth something when it's not ?

Whoever wrote that article either doesn't understand liberatarians AT ALL or I dont.

John Quigglin appears to be ignorant of what the Mises institute stands for and promotes. He wraps his article in logical fallacy expecting the reader to take his drivel seriously. It doesn't say a lot for Mr. PhD.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK. So point out where the Libertarians accept the scientific consensus on global warming and GHGs.

 

[FactFinder]

OK. So point out where the Libertarians accept the scientific consensus on global warming and GHGs.

Why that would be illogical.

 

[FactFinder]

This post from TokyoTom deplores the fact that (TT excepted) supporters of the Austrian School, and for that matter libertarians in general, are almost universally committed to delusional views on climate science. The obvious question is why. As TT points out, there are plenty of political opportunities to use climate change to attack subsidies and other existing interventions. And the fact that the environmental movement has shifted (mostly) from profound suspicion of markets to enthusiastic support for market-based policies such as carbon taxes and cap and trade seems like a big win. Most obviously, emissions trading relies on property rights and Austrians are supposed to like property rights.

On the other hand, given the near-universal rejection of mainstream climate science, we can draw one of only three conclusions
(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”
(b) Austrians/libertarians don’t understand their own theory and falsely believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong
(c) Austrians/libertarians do understand their own theory and correctly believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

While (a) clearly has some validity, most of the comments on climate science made here by self-described Austrians and libertarians suggest that either (b) or (c) is true. But which?

John Quiggin » Libertarians and delusionism

I see we have graduated from doublespeak to triplespeak. Better known as talking out of one's ass and thinking they have done something.

 

[Old Rocks]

Unfortunetly, the Libertarians are simply another bunch trying to create their own reality in leiu of recognizing the reality the universe presents us with. This kind of thinking is what drives the Creationists, Flat Earthers, and others that find reality unsuitable to their ideology.

 

[Oddball]

And the fact that the environmental movement has shifted (mostly) from profound suspicion of markets to enthusiastic support for market-based policies such as carbon taxes and cap and trade seems like a big win. Most obviously, emissions trading relies on property rights and Austrians are supposed to like property rights.

Total lie.

Cap-n-gouge attempts to turn an entirely mythical "threat" (CO2) into currency, by the aggressive force of mob rule.

Nobody would give you a gram of salt for a pound of CO2 in any organic marketplace.

 

[Oddball]

Unfortunetly, the Libertarians are simply another bunch trying to create their own reality in leiu of recognizing the reality the universe presents us with. This kind of thinking is what drives the Creationists, Flat Earthers, and others that find reality unsuitable to their ideology.

An oldie but a goodie:

Freudian Projection

The following is a collection of definitions of projection from orthodox psychology texts. In this system the distinct mechanism of projecting own unconscious or undesirable characteristics onto an opponent is called Freudian Projection.

* "A defense mechanism in which the individual attributes to other people impulses and traits that he himself has but cannot accept. It is especially likely to occur when the person lacks insight into his own impulses and traits."

* "The externalisation of internal unconscious wishes, desires or emotions on to other people. So, for example, someone who feels subconsciously that they have a powerful latent homosexual drive may not acknowledge this consciously, but it may show in their readiness to suspect others of being homosexual."

* "Attributing one's own undesirable traits to other people or agencies, e.g., an aggressive man accuses other people of being hostile."

* "The individual perceives in others the motive he denies having himself. Thus the cheat is sure that everyone else is dishonest. The would-be adulterer accuses his wife of infidelity."

* "People attribute their own undesirable traits onto others. An individual who unconsciously recognises his or her aggressive tendencies may then see other people acting in an excessively aggressive way."

* "Projection is the opposite defence mechanism to identification. We project our own unpleasant feelings onto someone else and blame them for having thoughts that we really have."

 

[Oddball]

(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”

Ad hominem attack and appeal to authority.

(b) Austrians/libertarians don’t understand their own theory and falsely believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

Pascal's wager.

(c) Austrians/libertarians do understand their own theory and correctly believe that, if mainstream climate science is right, their own views must be wrong

Non sequitur....Both could be wrong.


I notice that the author doesn't take into account that gullible warming junk science could just possibly be...well...junk. The author of this garbage should probably brush up on his Rand and check his premises.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hey Dooodeeee......... Tell us again how the election of Hoffman is going to presage President Obama going down in flames.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So now taxes and cap and trade are somehow market based policies? The more we dilute what the term "free market" truly means the more unscrupulous politicians and other enemies of capitalism are going to be able to point to the so-called failures of the "free market."

(a) Austrians/libertarians are characterized by delusional belief in their own intellectual superiority, to the point where they think they can produce an analysis of complex scientific problems superior to that of actual scientists, in their spare time and with limited or no scientific training in the relevant disciplines, reaching a startling degree of unanimity for self-described “sceptics”

This charge seems to get thrown around a lot at libertarians, and I know I've certainly gotten it quite a bit here on the forums. Why is it that when libertarians have a differing opinion than the so-called "experts" of a given field we're labelled arrogant? There's plenty of experts on any given side of an issue so why is it when we take a position we're arrogant? If a conservative holds an opinion they're not arrogant, and the same with progressives. Why is this charge almost exclusively reserved for libertarians?

 

[Old Rocks]

The charge in this thread concerns the Libertarians ignorance of global warming at the most basic level. And resistance to any attempt to address what is already beginning to cause major problems for a great many nations.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The charge in this thread concerns the Libertarians ignorance of global warming at the most basic level. And resistance to any attempt to address what is already beginning to cause major problems for a great many nations.

Uh huh. And are there no scientists that would argue, along with many libertarians, that global warming is indeed nonsense?

 

[JD_2B]

I believe fully in global warming and am a big tree hugging, non-scientist, yet still intelligent enough to use inductive reasoning, LIBERTARIAN.

So fuck off.

 

[Old Rocks]

The charge in this thread concerns the Libertarians ignorance of global warming at the most basic level. And resistance to any attempt to address what is already beginning to cause major problems for a great many nations.

Uh huh. And are there no scientists that would argue, along with many libertarians, that global warming is indeed nonsense?

Damned few.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The charge in this thread concerns the Libertarians ignorance of global warming at the most basic level. And resistance to any attempt to address what is already beginning to cause major problems for a great many nations.

Uh huh. And are there no scientists that would argue, along with many libertarians, that global warming is indeed nonsense?

Damned few.

So there we have it. Libertarians aren't simply making things up because we think we're smarter than scientists as there are plenty of scientists that back up the libertarian position.

 

[Old Rocks]

No, there are not plenty of scientists that back the libertarians position. In fact, there are not plenty of scientists that back Al Gore's position. A scientist does not back political positions concerning the science he does. He simply seeks the correct answers to questions that his research reveals.

Given that the vast majority of scientists belong to scientific societies, and that virually all of those societies, as well as all the National Academies of Science, and all the major universities state that global warming is real, and that the burning of fossil fuels is the primary contributor, I would say very few scientists, and very little evidence supports the Libetarian view.

In fact, the evidence supporting the Libertarian view on the matter of global warming is so scant as to be non-existant. As stated ealier, the Libertarian view is the triumph of ideology over the evidence of reality. And, like all such fairy tales, will end.