Is global climate policy actually about global income redistribution and enriching crony rulers around the world?

It is worth noting that according to this map Al Gore's new Palm Beach home will soon be under water. Yet he still bought the place.
It is worth noting that according to this map Al Gore’s new Palm Beach home will soon be under water. Yet he still bought the place.

This is not a new argument but it is one that I am particularly concerned with and one which is getting more attention.

I have written before that I have respect for many people within the climate change arena. I’ve worked closely with people who truly believe that climate change is a potential catastrophe. I once moderated a discussion on Wall Street discussing the ins and outs of a carbon tax. (All the participants were basically pro carbon tax.) I am not one who just dismisses the concerns of climate environmentalists out of hand. And I have always been honest with these folks as to my position which is essentially “convince me.” I have always held that to be “green” does not mean one must be “red” on the inside. I have kept an open mind and will continue to.

However there are aspects to the global climate change regime which concern me greatly. In some respects (perhaps even primarily) the regime does appear to be an attempt to extract wealth from the West (and the USA in particular) to enrich cronies, er I mean leaders, around the world. The new climate slush fund for instance (pushed by Obama at Paris last year) seems to be a vehicle just for that. And we the American taxpayers are the ones paying off the leaders of the recipient countries.

And I do think that some people within the climate change movement see mitigation of climate change, or global warming, as secondary to constructing a global order which puts the West and particularly the USA “in its place.”

If global warming is slowed, great. But we need to make the Americans pay.

I know not all climate environmentalists feel this way. But some do.

(From Investors Business Daily)

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

The plan is to allow Third World countries to emit as much carbon dioxide as they wish — because, as Edenhofer said, “in order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas” — while at the same time restricting emissions in advanced nations. This will, of course, choke economic growth in developed nations, but they deserve that fate as they “have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community,” he said. The fanaticism runs so deep that one professor has even suggested that we need to plunge ourselves into a depression to fight global warming.

Perhaps Naomi Klein summed up best what the warming the fuss is all about in her book “This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.”

“What if global warming isn’t only a crisis?” Klein asks in a preview of a documentary inspired by her book. “What if it’s the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?”

“Better world” my arse.

Click here for the article.

By the way, no one has ever explained to me adequately why the United States needs to be in the United Nations. The UN seems a waste of time and resources which works against American interests consistently.