“Get Angry” failed for the Climatistas. Will they now try a wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing approach called “Going Right”?
The Economist comments in “Getting angry and going right“,
And although American environmentalists are regrouping after a series of setbacks, they’re hardly going to abandon the issue of climate change. Reinforced data may help as they retool their strategies.
What will those strategies be? Over at Duck of Minerva, Josh Busby, a political scientist at the University of Texas, looks at two alternatives: “Get Angry” or “Go Right”. The first would involve a more voluble environmental movement as a counterweight to the fractious climate sceptics (who are, keep in mind, the minority)—a sort of “Green Tea Party” organised around such issues as the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. The second strategy would involve building the coalition by reaching out to Republicans, by focusing on the potential economic benefits of a shift to clean power, for example, or the national-security implications of dependence on oil imports…
“Going right” on climate change is a worthwhile idea. As I’ve written before, with regard to criminal-justice reform, if the “opposite” party signs on to your programme, there’s your proof of concept. And if climate change is a bridge too far, you can tweak the strategy to “go right” on subsidiary issues, like developing renewable energy.
This sort of strategy has already been tried by T. Boone Pickens (see below), ironically, someone who is already on the right. But “green” and “clean” are just bad ideas, no matter who the salesmen are.
Click for JunkScience.com’s T. Boone Pickens series: