Why does this photo make you smile? What is humorous about one dog leading another by a leash? If a dog doesn’t know where to go himself, how can he know where to lead other dogs? Much as he might enjoy the game, he is no wiser than those he tries to lead. That is precisely my point.
Are you a control freak? Do your family and friends complain that you always want to be in control? This problem causes difficulties in personal life. But consider what political positions a control freak might take. The underlying motivation of totalitarianism may be an insatiable urge to control others.
● The temperature of the earth may have risen 0.6 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years. This is hardly alarming – the climate in the Middle Ages was even warmer. In fact, Mars and Pluto are also warming, because of a small increase in energy output by the sun. Moreover, the warming stopped about the time of the millennium, but if you point this out, you will be forcibly ejected from climate meetings. Science depends on free discussion; would-be tyrants depend on silencing dissent.
Did you know that as of July, 2018, the Arctic Ocean was almost entirely covered with ice? Usually, this late in the year, most of the ice has melted. But did you see that in the mainstream media? No, you learned it only from conservative websites. Or did you know that in 1909, when Peary was first to reach the North Pole, he had to leave northern Canada on Feb. 28, when the sun was barely above the horizon? If he waited for spring, the ice would have melted to the point that it would not support a dog sled.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Melting of North Polar ice in summer, to a greater or lesser degree, has been going on since we have known what was going on there. It is not a recent change. Question: If all the North Polar ice melted, how much would the sea level rise? Answer: Not one millimeter. The ice floats on the water. Archimedes knew this 2200 years ago. Global warming alarmists have yet to learn it.
Calmer observers suggest adapting to the slightly higher temperatures. But alarmists use computer projections to predict disaster unless drastic measures are taken. They want to control what light bulbs and toilets we use, what cars (if any) we drive, even whether we barbecue in the back yard. They want to control the economy as if they were Marxists. (As if?)
There may be less intrusive ways to lower global temperatures. We could alter jet airliner exhausts, or place a large satellite between the earth and the sun. Yet these possibilities are never mentioned by global-warming activists. Their object is people control, not climate control.
● We delude ourselves that we will all be safe and happy, if only we ban guns, ban pesticides, build no new power plants or dams, ban SUVs, treat women like men, and force airport screeners to search elderly ladies from Fargo instead of young men from the Middle East. But not one of these actions affects the main cause of human suffering: human evil.
The key delusion underlying all these unsuccessful attempts to create an earthly paradise is that something we did caused the trouble. So if we stop doing it, all will be well. That is, we are in control. We live in the richest, most powerful nation on earth, but there are limits to what we can do. We can barely control ourselves, much less everyone else.
Take health care. If people lack health insurance, we could have expanded Medicaid to cover them, using a sliding payment scale with the poor receiving free care. Instead, we empowered remote, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats to make life-and-death decisions for all 328 million Americans. ObamaCare provided not one penny for more doctors or nurses, but did provide funding for 16,500 new IRS agents. What does this say about the real purpose of the law?
The dog leading the other dog with a leash doesn’t look so humorous anymore, does he?
We can use what help science gives. But science is the search for knowledge of the physical universe. It has nothing to say about the moral universe. Science can describe the trajectory of a bullet, but it can’t tell us whether murder is wrong. If we want answers to the ultimate questions, we must look elsewhere.
It may be painful or frightening, but we must see reality for what it is. Most criminals hurt people because they enjoy hurting people. Not because of guns, poverty, racism, social injustice, or anything else we can control. Criminals, including terrorists, hurt people because they lack good values and have bad values. It’s that simple – and that complex.
Liberals need to be in control, but the irony is that they reject one course that might actually give them some control. They oppose efforts to restore ethical values to our schools. They oppose behavior codes, dress codes, abstinence education, and posting the Ten Commandments. Then they are shocked − shocked! − when value-free education produces value-free graduates. Of course, value-free people do things that make liberals feel even more frightened and out of control. And so it goes.
Leftists see 9/11 in economic terms. They assume that people hate us not because of religious fanaticism and an urge to murder “infidels.” They narcissistically assume that everyone is like them − interested only in material things. So they assume 9/11 must have been about oil.
People crash airliners into office towers not because of what we do wrong, but because of who we are. We are free; they are totalitarians. We respect women’s rights; they see women as property. We value individuality; they have contempt for it. We advocate religious pluralism; they spit on it.
These issues dwarf economics, but not in the liberal mind. These issues reflect fundamental differences on the question of good and evil. In the end, it’s not the economy, stupid.
In a final spasm of attempted control, some people go so far as to admit that Al Qaeda may have carried out the attacks on 9/11, but it was really the CIA pulling the strings − for oil, of course, or other nefarious motives. That is, we attacked ourselves. The illusion of control is preserved, even in the face of devastating evidence to the contrary.
Why do leftists have more sympathy for extremist Muslims than for conservatives? Leftists and extremist Muslims share a compulsion to control people. The same compulsion is shared by environmentalists. Think about it. Leftists and environmentalists oppose drilling for oil or gas, mining coal, and building dams or nuclear power plants. But who benefits? Middle Eastern despots keep their stranglehold on oil supplies, while local totalitarians dictate how we live our lives so we can “save the planet.” Could it be that oil sheiks are supporting the environmentalists financially? Nobody asks that question.
Leftists and “greens” in bed with Muslim fanatics? Strange bedfellows? Maybe not so strange. They have a lot in common: contempt for freedom and for the sanctity of the individual, as well as an urge to punish “heretics.”
To me, a liberal is someone like my mother, who was always for the underdog. And an environmentalist is someone like my father, who went around the house turning off unused lights. But people who want to punish me for politically incorrect speech, or tell me what kind of light bulbs and toilets I can buy – or how to vote – are just control freaks. They love control. I love freedom. We must choose which one we prefer, or we risk losing both.
•
Contact: dstol@prodigy.net. You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.
www.stolinsky.com