## Tuesday, January 14, 2014

### UNFCC boss: democracy is "very detrimental" for war on AGW

Chinese communism is the best decision-making system
A widget-free version of this blog post is here...
Bloomberg published a remarkable story yesterday:
Top Global Emitter China Best on Climate Change, Figueres Says (main link, click)
The chairwoman of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change Ms Christiana Figueres of Costa Rica has concluded that "the political divide in the U.S. Congress has slowed efforts to pass climate legislation and is very detrimental to the fight against global warming" while "China is also able to implement policies because its political system avoids some of the legislative hurdles seen in countries including the U.S.".

The totalitarian system rocks while democracy sucks!

Well, I am sure that Adolf Hitler's one-party system would be even better for this "lady" than the Chinese one-party system if it were available. At any rate, democracy is the biggest enemy.

I hope that this story will open the eyes of many people who will be lucky to learn about it and who will realize that the actual goal of the climatism is to liquidate democracy, freedom, and prosperity in the world.

Even if you thought that it is a good idea to reduce the CO2 emissions (it's not), Figueres' totalitarian advertisements are indefensible by the struggle to reduce the CO2 emissions because China's CO2 emissions were actually growing significantly more quickly than America's emissions in recent years – and China overtook the U.S. as the world's #1 producer of CO2 six years ago or so (and I am not even talking about the real polution, a real problem, that remains brutal at many places of China).

It's the very ability of the one-party system to neutralize the opposition of any kind that is so intriguing for Ms Figueres and thousands of champions of the climate alarmism. It's what their talk about the "consensus" and the dissatisfaction with the "contrarians" is all about.

The goal of these people is to stop democracy, freedom, and prosperity regardless of the fate of Nature, the temperatures, or the CO2 concentrations.

According to the Czech law, the woman is involved in criminal activity because she is promoting movements aiming to suppress human rights, freedom, and democracy which is illegal here (this bill is perhaps a naive attempt not to repeat Nazism or communism that ruled us for 50% of the 20th century). I guess that she is just fine and safe in the New York City where people apparently believe that the main international organization, the U.N., with its top officials urging America to abandon democracy is not a threat.

Just to be sure, Ms Figueres, the "slow" negotiations in the U.S. Congress – known as democracy – are not detrimental at all. They are what keeps the society decent, what allows it to search and find a better solution among at least two, and what protects the society against power-thirsty and intolerant individuals like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, and yourself. The well-being of America is one of the arguments supporting the view that freedom and democracy are precious values that must be defended even if it goes against frantically worshiped pseudosciences such as eugenics, Lysenkoism, the cultural revolution, and the climate alarmism.

Figueres isn't the first climate alarmist who praises the Chinese political system. She was preceded by Thomas Friedmann of the NYT, Nancy Pelosi 1/2, James Hansen, Al Gore, and others.

Off-topic: Click the image above for a semi-official Iranian (Farsnews) report claiming that some Snowden documents imply that Obama is controlled by the "Tall Whites", a race of extraterrestrial aliens that previously brought Hitler to power and allowed his empire to increase the production of weapons. Russia is said to be "stunned" by the findings. ;-) Maybe the Aryan white race weren't Nordic but extraterrestrial, after all. The most worrisome trouble, the last sentence reveals, is the possibility that America's or Obama's foes may have teamed up with another extraterrestrial race.

I suppose that it may be the case of the Iranians. At any rate, Obama and Kerry found it very important to sign a peace treaty with these complete nuts and legitimize their uranium enrichment. How can one disagree with the Israeli defense minister who pointed out that Kerry suffers from the messianic complex when he tries to impose his version of peace on Israel and Palestine? Obama's spokeswoman immediately pointed out that Obama himself is behind Kerry's Palestinian policies. That hasn't improved the situation, I guess, unless bullying of an ally is called an improvement.

1. Ms. Figueres implies that China is making short-term sacrifices for its long-term benefit and that’s what we all should be doing. That is 100% bullshit!
No country on this planet is more pragmatic and less
forward-looking than China. Everything that China’s government does is for the purpose of maintaining internal political stability; even complete nincompoops know that. The 80% drop in solar panel prices, for example, was pure business, nothing more, and it was a direct result of misguided solar subsidies by other governments.

2. The suit gives the game away: Mrs Blofeld, or Kimette Jong-il? One of the two.

Either way, she should be shot on sight.

No wait, I've got it! — Todesengel's hauskieper. Yeah, that's her.

Fire at will.

3. I cringe slightly at describing the American political system as "Democracy." The more accurate term is (or rather was) Constitutional Representative Republicanism.

The distinction is important because pure democracy is probably nearly as awful as a dictatorship: it matters not if the dictator is one man or 51% of all men (and women) if any man can impose his will on another.

Of course, she is full of shit in suggesting that the US political process is an obstacle and Chinese communism helpful to "solving" the "problem" of "climate change." What she really means is that it is an obstacle to imposing the policies she wants, that have nothing to do with climate: Socialism.

After all, one may observe that the result of the political process *not* imposing emissions reductions on the American people has been...that Americans have reduced their CO2 emissions.

On the contrary China may have the power to readily impose such a policy, but funnily enough they are the least interested, apart from India, of any country in actually doing so. So much for that.

4. brothersmartmouthJan 15, 2014, 3:41:00 AM

Even the "wealth redistribution" line is a ruse. These people are extortionists. They need more poor people so they can fleece the middle class. Give us money or we will tell the poor that any nasty weather event is your fault. And killing free market democracy is key to achieving those ends.
A nest of thieves.

5. Henrik LindgaardJan 15, 2014, 5:19:00 AM

Oh man! You are a angry bunch. :D.. Although I agree that miss(mrs) F. is wrong, I believe it is something as simple as misguided ignorance. She does not know which CO2-demands are imposed on China - more precisely a GDP-locked maximum limit on CO2, a limit which would, if China maintains a minimum of future projections, mean a doubling of todays CO2 emissions and still be within the agreed upon quota :D.. China: smart - Rest of world: stupid :D

6. Most countries with democratic systems avoid the "gridlock" where the prime minister is from the party controlling the legislative branch.

I think this is a bug not a feature - gridlock is good - but that form of democracy should satisfy those who envy China's "decision making superiority."

7. Lubos, I have a somewhat different take on Figueres. To my mind she is the flip-side of the (UNEP's) Achim Steiner coin.

Steiner has never met a "potential problem" that he cannot convert into the 'greatest threat to the future of the planet™'

Figueres, OTOH, has never met an obstacle that she cannot convert into the greatest opportunity for advancing her oh-so-precious "climate [finance] regime".

Figueres and Steiner co-habit a rather remote planet that is unacquainted with - if not irreconcilably divorced from - anything that approaches reality.

Her effusions have always reminded me of the 'go-team-go' chants of bimbo cheerleaders (at least those of my school-days) whose mindless enthusiasms never flag even when their "team" is losing ... big-time!

8. Well, at least the "Tall Whites" are neither racist nor nationalist....

9. Page won't post to Facebook

10. Isn't this what you expect to hear from a fascist? I've more than had enough of UN climate hacks proclaiming democracy is the problem. They possess an activated "oppression gene" that must be satisfied. They detest a free people, and will tell lie after lie for more control over us.

The longer this hoax goes on the more light shines into some very dark places.The climate change issue exists as a mechanism to gain power over individuals not to save the planet.

I'm pretty sure that the US people rate the UN well below a sleazy used car salesman. Obama probably loves 'em.

11. This is a very good post Luboš, thank you.

12. http://www.popsci.com/article/science/infographic-scientists-who-doubt-human-caused-climate-change

13. Hey Lumo, I think the x-axis in your graph is screwed and the increments is simple years, not decades? The difference is bigger - see also:
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=CO2ts1990-2012
2012 pure CO2 USA 5.1 China 9.8
or all greenhouse gases CO2 equiv bT:
2010 USA 6.7 China 11.1

14. The increments are irregular, 1 year on the left and 5 years on the right. It's not my graph.

15. I see that Lumo, however whoever did it used some numbers which look totally wrong in comparison with the source I found (from EDGAR "The current development of EDGAR is a joint project of the European Commission JRC Joint Research Centre and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL).")
So either the European commission number are wrong or the source you have (institute of energy research) underestimated grossly the real development, depending when the graph was done.

The 2020 prognosis from the graph was overdone in reality in 2012.
The increase of about 15% per year of China's emissions points to a much higher output in 2020.

16. lol, honey I shrunk the consensus:
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/09/monckton-honey-i-shrunk-the-consensus/

17. She tipped her hand. As others have noted, Green is the new red. Climate alarmism is seen as a convenient vehicle to global totalitarianism.

18. "The goal of these people is to stop democracy, freedom, and prosperity regardless of the fate of Nature, the temperatures, or the CO2 concentrations."

Wow. That is the stupidest thing I've read in a long while.