Krugman: “Dissent Is Treason”
By Mitch Berg
Remember when dissent was the highest civic virtue?
That is, naturally and inevitably, what happens when Republicans are in office.
But dissent an anti-scientific socialist power grab?
Still, is it fair to call climate denial a form of treason? Isn’t it politics as usual?Yes, it is — and that’s why it’s unforgivable.
Do you remember the days when Bush administration officials claimed that terrorism posed an “existential threat” to America, a threat in whose face normal rules no longer applied? That was hyperbole — but the existential threat from climate change is all too real.
Yet the deniers are choosing, willfully, to ignore that threat, placing future generations of Americans in grave danger, simply because it’s in their political interest to pretend that there’s nothing to worry about. If that’s not betrayal, I don’t know what is.
I’m only being mildly hyperbolic when I wonder if we’ll see show trials by 2016, should Obama win another term.
June 30th, 2009 at 8:28 am
To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.
Paul Krugman, Aug 2002: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html
World’s worst economist. He’s probably got his entire portfolio invested in Times stock.
June 30th, 2009 at 8:55 am
“Climate denial”? Is this dork serious? To believe liberal dogma you really do have to disconect major parts of your brain.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Of course these are the guys that think borrowing trillions from the Chinese is good sound economic policy.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Remember the apoplectic outrage from the Left when it was suggested that Americans who advocated retreating from Iraq because the war was going badly were unpatriotic?
June 30th, 2009 at 11:03 am
But… he supports The One Who Won.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
What a vile column and a vile columnist.As usual Nobel-prize winner Krugman’s favorite rhetorical tactic is attacking strawmen, ad-hominem attack, insinuation, and assertion-as-fact. He would have us believe that the people who support crap like Waxman-Markey are doing so only because the science demands it — in other words, science is giving us moral instruction.
Science says that gene-mod crops are safe and can save millions of lives. Does Krugman call anti-GM crop people ‘traitors’ to mankind? Science also says that intelligence is real, and it is heritable to a very large degree. Krugman has no problem with denying this scientific reality. Why are we only supposed to credit science with giving us moral instruction when science happens to agree with Krugman?
He’s not even being honest to his own argument. If Krugman really believed the Shibai that he’s piling up, he would be in favor of building nuclear power plants. He is not.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
I really don’t know any “climate deniers”, or anyone who thinks our climate does not change. Does he really not understand how mentally retarded he sounds when he uses the words “climate deniers”?
Now that the “globe” has stopped “warming” (for the time being), we should really be letting the AGW cultists know how gullible and stupid they have been behaving.