Government and corporate officials are finally starting to say and do the right thing on climate, homelessness, and censorship. Why is that?
It is easy to despair about how and why politicians and activists have, in recent years, created catastrophic fires from Hawaii to Greece, the so-called “homelessness” problem, and the Censorship Industrial Complex. Climate-obsessed officials and activists focused the attention and resources of electrical utilities, Public Utility Commissions, and state legislatures on building new solar and wind projects, not fire prevention. Progressive government officials and activists demanded that people suffering from untreated mental illness and addiction be allowed to sleep, use drugs, and defecate in parks and on sidewalks, even when a shelter bed is available to them. And elites convinced themselves and others that Trump Republicans, Covid skeptics, critics of transgenderism, and many others, posed a direct threat to life and a clear and present threat to democracy and needed to be secretly censored online.
At the same time, over the last several months, elected leaders and corporate executives have been forced to change their tune and even their policies on homelessness, fires, and censorship. Not only have both Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor London Breed finally come out and said they support shutting down the open drug scenes euphemistically referred to as “homeless encampments,” the Department of Justice is taking action to shut down New York’s government-run drug use site. Elected officials and journalists from Hawaii to California to Greece have acknowledged that societies can prevent catastrophic fires and are not doomed to them because of climate change. And, earlier this week, Facebook fired a highly partisan fact checker in Australia, which Sky News had exposed and I had amplified on X (formerly Twitter).
These are all just baby steps in the right direction, to be sure. Nations remain grossly unprepared to deal with all manner of disasters, not just fires but also floods, in large measure because their governing parties convinced themselves that solar panels and wind turbines were more important than fire and flood protection. The reality on the ground in San Francisco is worse than ever, with drug dealing more flagrant than ever, drug overdoses rising, and advocates of government drug use sites spreading misinformation about their efficacy. And the Censorship Industrial Complex remains fully funded, intact, and strong enough to use an advertiser boycott to force X to adopt a “freedom of speech, not of reach” policy, which is a form of censorship.
But these steps backward do not erase the progress being made. Now that climatist politicians from Hawaii, California, and Greece have been forced to acknowledge that fire prevention works and promise to do more of it, they will either have to follow through or hand their opponents a powerful argument for removing them. Now that California’s top Democratic politicians, CNN, and the rest of the mainstream news media have been forced to come out in support of shutting down open-air drug scenes and opposing drug use sites, as we had repeatedly urged, including on Dr. Phil, politicians will either have to do so or face electoral defeat. And now that Facebook has, more than once now, modified its censorship in apparent response to criticism, it has implicitly acknowledged the unfairness of its policies, and that is good news for those concerned about the direction of X, which says to its credit, that it will be transparent about throttling “reach,” which is progress compared to pre-Elon Musk Twitter.
What’s more, there’s strong and growing evidence that backlash against climatism, wokeism, and censorship has only just begun. The research showing industrial wind activities along the East Coast are killing whales may well be enough, along with the bad economics of offshore wind, to halt most projects. Now that Democratic politicians have agreed to shut down open drug scenes and government drug sites, the impatience of voters will rise even more since the ideological and policy debate is over, and voters can hold politicians accountable for their promises. And, any day now, we are likely to see the Fifth Circuit Court rule in favor of the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana in their lawsuit against the Biden administration for censorship, presenting the Supreme Court with a golden opportunity to hear and rule against any future repetition of the now well-documented instances of censorship over the last few years.
What explains all of this recent progress, and how can we leverage it to create a pro-human majority in the US and the Western world?
Evidence, Voice, Movement
Categories: Culture Wars/Current Controversies