The Economist has a column about why we Americans haven’t jumped with both feet onto the global warming panic. The writer, E.G. (no bylines in TE, which I like), lists some items. His list leaves out some crucial points, such as the unattractiveness of the hysteria angle, the dire predictions that have already proven false, the loss of credibility from Climategate, the changing terminology, Al Gore!, and that the proposed cures, the common sense tells Americans understand, could well be worse than the supposed disease.
But part—a small part, but still a part—of the skepticism that exists is the perception that many of the those who promote global warming tend to look down their noses at “the folks.” E.G.’a conclusion proves the point:
As my colleague said yesterday, “The idea that sustainable-resource use and renewable energy is some kind of socialist hippy hobby is incredibly naive and frivolous, and extremely damaging to the American economy.” I agree, and this is an area where M.S. could make common cause with conservatives. Even people who don’t believe in climate change, even here in Darkest Texas, believe in renewable-energy companies. Nearly two-thirds, again according to Rasmussen, say that renewables are a better investment for America than fossil fuels.
Yes, “Darkest” Texas, where people think that pursuing cleaner forms of energy is merely hippy-dippy. The rubes.
Here’s a hint: People with common sense know you can both exploit our natural resources and pursue renewables at the same time. In fact doing the former will help generate the wealth to permit engaging in the latter. And wealth is what it is going to take to move from fossil fuels over time.
But to the broader point, If you want people to follow where you want to lead, don’t disrespect them.