How Climate Change Became A ‘Liberal Hoax’
Friday, July 15, 2011
Source: the9billion.com
The Climate Change ‘Hoax’
Speaking about how there has been a concerted (and successful) public relations campaign to convince the public that climate change is a liberal hoax






CHOMSKY'S FLAWS
By MARKS, Howard at Jul 27, 2011 11:23 AM
The institutional analysis NC was putting forward is correct but missing the most important issue and example of them all. The CHEVRON OIL PATENT ON THE ELECTRIC CAR BATTERY on all types of electric car batteries. A technology that is also needed to power homes and farms and other applications. There is NO engineering reason why you cannot get 1200 miles of ALL ELECTRIC driving in the heaviest SUV it is entirely due to the imprisonment of EV batteries held hostage by the CHEVRON OIL PATENT that covers ALL types of advanced EV batteries. GENERAL MOTORS sold or gave the rights to EV batteries to TEXACO then CHEVRON OIL bought TEXACO and then rewrote the PATENT to cover all existing and future EV batteries.
It was GM who handed the EV battery to the OIL MAFIA.
We need a global movement demanding the abolition of that the CHEVRON OIL PATENT.
This technology is nothing less than the key element to a total global transformation no new
societal model with work without it., People in the Far North be it Canada or Norway could run
biodomes and greenhouses growing tropical fruits and all forms of vegetables 365 days a year
even if there is deep snow outside. The Far North is light for 22 hours a day in summer and dark
for 22 hours a day in winter. Only the liberated high density batteries could store enough solar
and wind generated electricity to last through the winter the same batteries that can make an
SUV go 1200 miles on a single charge the same technology that is for now in a CHEVRON
OIL prison.
Howard Simon Marks
Manchester UK xuanvu@asia.com
Reply this comment
Culpable Citizenry
By Keller, Keith at Jul 15, 2011 22:16 PM
I greatly respect and admire Noam Chomsky, however, he seems to have a blind spot concerning citizen culpability in all of this. Sure, the American people have been lied to and propagandized by the corporate media, but so what? Why would anyone expect it to be different? A key issue Noam never addresses is the psychology of the average person whereby they seem so gullible, so easily deceived. Faithful followers of elite rule who willingly deceive themselves for psychological reasons. None of what is happening would be happening with a concerned, rational electorate. Endless calls for organizing the workers/citizenry/etc are an admission that the average person is incapable of thinking for herself and needs guidance. They are angry. They are confused. What are the implications for democracy of such a confused and easily led citizenry? And what are the implications of a power elite so fixated on power accumulation that they willingly pursue policies which destroy the planet?
Reply this comment
Re: Culpable Citizenry
By Phillips, Blair M. at Jul 18, 2011 14:24 PM
The environment is where we live. If we destroy it, live can't exsist. Hope I understood the statement surrounding the above statement.
Reply this comment
Re: Re: Culpable Citizenry
By Keller, Keith at Jul 18, 2011 21:01 PM
My comment concerned the culpability of the citizenry which I feel that Noam tends to downplay. “but so what?” refers to the fact that the corporate media routinely and predictably lie to the public, however, this is more or less a fact of life that in no way excuses the citizenry from having some elementary grasp of reality and discharging their duties as citizens. In other words, I don’t buy the idea that the people are blame free because they are lied to, and that the problem is exclusively related to media performance. Somehow, you have twisted this to be an anti-environmental statement. It is not. I am very concerned about the environment and am concerned that my fellow citizens are psychologically faithful followers easily deceived by media propaganda. If they were suitably rational, then the anti-global warming propaganda would have had little if any effect. Have I made my position clear?
Reply this comment
Re: Re: Re: Culpable Citizenry
By Phillips, Blair M. at Jul 18, 2011 21:19 PM
Reply this comment
Re: Culpable Citizenry
By Yearwood, Kelvin at Jul 20, 2011 23:55 PM
The propaganda system has to work to to an extent, and confusion is part of the work. And, as Chomsky makes clear, it is stoked by a co-ordinator class of executives whose legal duty and life-blood is to marginalise environmental concerns in the interests of corporate shareholder profit.
I met many young Greek people when I was living on Edinburgh in Scotland in the 90s, and their general view of their politicians was that they were corrupt scum. Americans are brought up to venerate presidents and politicians. The US has a culture of imperial superiority, its exceptionalism, which plays into the hands of its political and business elites, in that many US people clearly take a pride in seeing the people who supposedly run the country, and supposedly run it for their benefit, as of a superior ilk on the world stage.
Here in the UK, there is far too much respect for politicians and business leaders, but at one remove from the imperial US flag-ship, open general public contempt is more readily visible - only recently I was part of a large public sector demonstration that dominated central London for a day, expressing complete no-confidence in the current and recently elected government. Of course, this can be exaggerated - e.g. UK satirists are often and ultimately rather self-congratulatory and spineless these days.
But, importantly, I believe Chomsky is about leaving things open enough in his beliefs for people to surprise us. The Arab Spring was an example. It seriously shook a thousand year old Western, racist homogenising oriental position on Arab peoples. You cannot discount historical ruptures and surprises.
Reply this comment
Re: Culpable Citizenry
By Polson, Rufus at Jul 24, 2011 22:55 PM
I mean, if that's the way people are and that's the part of the problem you focus on, then the only solution I can envision is highly sophisticated mass genetic engineering to transform the population into a new and less gullible kind of person. Not a particularly workable, or indeed ethical, approach to social change.
One problem I see is that to the individual, lies and truth are both just pieces of their overall intake of information, and it's not so obvious how to distinguish them. If you are too ready to reject lies, would you not reject truth as well and lose your ability to learn and function effectively? The world is very complex. Knowledge is constructed socially, and civilization depends on the ability to stack knowledge on top of other knowledge. Nobody is smart enough to reproduce everything from first principles that generations of thinkers have been building up. The best anyone can do is selective spot-checking of the information they're given. But if you were never taught critical thinking, how to logically evaluate an argument, how to evaluate evidence for it and research factual claims, then what do you do when you're presented with a large edifice of propaganda, where most of the media say the same thing and are backed up by respected authorities? How are you supposed to debunk such an interlocking structure, especially if it's about issues that aren't your personal hobby-horse and you have a lot of other things to do? It's very difficult.
Reply this comment
Species devastation
By Rissler, Michael at Jul 15, 2011 20:05 PM
I have been away from the U.S. for many years teaching and doing research, now I am back. Seeing what is happening in every area, including the current budget deficit crisis, is astonishing and would be almost humorous, or certainly fodder for a clever social satirist, if the situation were not so serious in terms of the declining welfare of large numbers of people. And, I know that although the U.S. is wealthy and comfortable in comparison to many countries (and I have lived in Latin America so I know something of what this means), the trend is downward and rapid here, and when this happens it has secondary effects in other countries, devastating effects in other countries that are not wealthy and comfortable for more than 10-15% of their populations.
Civilizations and empires decline, much more slowly, for example, than the destruction of a tsunami or earthquake, and for this reason, for a long time large parts of the population make adjustments: we move less, cut a bit out of the budget here and there, seek other part-time jobs to make up for other losses, put off optional health care decisions, and so forth. Eventually, however, the impact of all of these adjustments adds up, sometimes over a few years, even. But much is lost and this is eventually seen. Again, these losses impact on people in other countries in myriad ways, just as increasing global warming and pollution spread their impact over the planet. I have met people who have lost their homes, businesses, and hopes in just the short time I have been back.
I know that Noam says what he says not to paint dark pictures, but rather to encourage, even provoke us to working together more, much more. It is late, too late to wait in inaction.
Reply this comment