I en artikel i den intellektuella tidskriften Quadrant beskriver Ian McFadyen dagens environmentalism (miljörörelsens filosofi) som en ny religion som etablerat sig.
bara snabbskummat nu läst hela artikeln, som bl a sammanfattar historien av vidskepelse. En del referenser rör australienska personer och parallell till religion är meststadels till kristendomen, men artikeln är mycket bra och läsvärd. I synnerhet fram till exemplen, vilka kanske kunnat djuploda och problematisera lite mer.
Citat ur inledningen:
...there was another issue which suffused the Opposition campaign and which played a major part in persuading voters: climate change, in particular the recent drought. John Howard may be the first leader in the modern world to be voted out of office partly because he failed to make it rain.
Howard, however, may not be the last leader to be deposed over this issue, for the last few years have seen the surprise reappearance of a belief which was thought to have been extinct for centuries: the belief that human beings can control the weather.
...when bushfires burnt out several Canberra suburbs in 2003, New South Wales Premier Bob Carr said that the reason for the disaster was that John Howard had refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. The implication was that simply the act of signing the Protocol would have changed Australia’s climate even before the policies set out in it had been implemented.
En bra bit ned:
Environmentalists, however, refuse to even countenance the idea of adaptation.
The reason is simple: Environmentalists fear that if people start discussing ways to adapt to climate change, especially if they start to think that it might be easier to adapt than reduce, the sense of urgency will abate and people will start to wonder if they might be able to get through the crisis without changing their behaviour at all.
[...] Like the medieval concept of Hell, climate change is portrayed as involving supernatural levels of suffering with no possibility of escape or parole. Its consequences are exaggerated without limit, despite having no empirical evidence, to include worldwide devastation, killer storms, global famine, floods, epidemics of disease and other disasters of—dare I say it—biblical proportions.
Christianity has Satan and his minions; Environmentalism has the oil companies and the coal miners. These are the devils that bring woe into the world, who tempt weak humans into sin by offering them cars, trucks, planes and central heating in snowbound winters. The power of the fossil fuel demons is vast and they are always working to undermine the saintly work of the Environmentalists. Scientists who question the climate change hypothesis are “spokespersons for the energy companies” or “in the pocket of Big Oil”: in other words they are the tools of Satan.
Kan väl illustreras med detta klipp med vänsterklichéer från en organisation som stött Obama:
Environmentalism has, in a mere fifty years, attained the hegemony, political influence and moral authority formerly accorded to the church. We have come the full circle to a pre-Enlightenment society, ruled by an officially sanctioned religion that is as dogmatic, inquisitorial and eschatological as medieval Christianity, where environmental scientists are the clergy, Green is the colour of purity and the central icon is not Jesus suffering on a cross but the image of a tortured planet dying for our sins.
Uppdatering: Gore’s church losing followers. Rätt kul artikel av politiske kolumnisten Dan Sernoffsky i Lebanon Daily News. Man kan iofs inte skylla Gore för environmentalismen, även om poänger finns. Vet heller inte om Europas ledare backat från sina positioner såsom den libanesiske skribenten menar?
Andra bloggar om: samhälle, vetenskap, miljö, religion, ideologi, koldioxid, klimatfrågan, klimatdebatt, Australien