Government by Hysteria: The Climate and Covid Hobgoblins Begin to Fade

 

TILAK DOSHI

Former President Ronald Reagan famously said that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help”. His point was that Government “help” often leads to worse outcomes for its supposed beneficiaries. Not only have many governments been incredibly inefficient in achieving claimed objectives of helping citizens, but they have often proved to be malicious in intent: the “help” offered has been a cover to stay in power.

Liberal democracies have a limited repertoire of state-sanctioned carrots and sticks, and none of these allow governments to easily trample citizens’ rights enshrined in law such as habeas corpus or the right to trial in a court of law. There are certain norms that apply to government action in modern liberal democracies, and these cannot easily be over-ridden. We call these norms civilised.

Nonetheless, we have witnessed in our lifetimes a new mode of practical politics observed by the great essayist H. L. Mencken. He said, in so many words, that our governments manufacture imaginary hobgoblins – creatures of the mind that can be mischievous, frightening and even dangerous – and then wait for citizens to clamour for safety.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary

In serving those needs for safety, governments are more likely to get re-elected. Government by hysteria in other words, where fear and alarm are cultivated, then weaponised, for political ends.

Yet exploiting hysteria to govern, with dramatic displays of outrage or emotion, is not without challenges. Hobgoblins cannot bamboozle everyone all the time. Fear and alarm wear out, and truth matters in justifying policies that impact the livelihoods of people.

The Climate Hobgoblins

Climate hobgoblins have been long in the making. Maurice Strong, a Canadian environmentalist and principal architect of the 1972 Stockholm conference – the first global summit to make the environment the central issue – proclaimed that “If we don’t change, our species will not survive. … Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilisation to collapse.” For mere hobgoblins, this was big stuff. These ones endangered mankind itself.

The threatening features of this genre of hobgoblins went through several permutations. It started with Paul Ehrlich’s famine and war through over-population and the Club of Rome’s prediction of inevitable resource scarcity. It then morphed into global cooling during the 1970s, before finally settling for global warming (now called ‘climate change’) due to effects of greenhouse gases. The focus is on the trace gas carbon dioxide mainly emitted by humans combusting fuels for industry, cooking, heating, cooling and transport.

The story is that the CO2 hobgoblins are the control knob of climate and, by extension, our cataclysmic future, a theory spread via the panic of a Swedish school drop-out who deleted her predictive tweet about the end of the world by 2023. Along with the Swede Greta Thunberg (now a campaigner for Palestinian rights) are the assorted ‘climate scientists’ who have conjured up the climate hobgoblins with their global warming ‘hockey stick’ charts and their pseudoscientific climate models duly adopted by the UN’s IPCC.

Lionel Shriver captures the climate hobgoblins’ mischievousness well:

They take temperature readings at Heathrow airport. They refuse to cite less distressing satellite readings. They attribute single weather events to climate change without supporting data. They play on the fact that up close, all natural disasters seem like the worst ever. They suppress good news, such as the recovery of the Great Barrier Reef and the fact that hurricanes have not grown more frequent – only reporting the ’hottest July on record’ without noting when the ‘record’ goes back only to 1940.

The work of the climate hobgoblins has stoked up the climate hysteria which is amplified by the mass media on almost daily basis. The deluge of catastrophic predictions regarding climate change and its consequences has reached everyone on the planet. One has only to cite the frequent hyperbolic pronouncements by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who never tires of reminding his global audience of the “climate emergency”: it is “a code red for humanity. The alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable”; the “era of global boiling has arrived”, and so on ad nauseam.

John Clauser, a 2022 Nobel prize laureate in physics, finds climate alarmism “a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people”. He continues:

Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, agencies and environmentalists.

The COVID-19 Hobgoblins

If the climate hobgoblins were long in the making, the Covid variety were anything but. The first reports of COVID-19 emerged in late December 2019, when an outbreak of an unidentified form of pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organisation (WHO) and the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began reporting on the outbreak in January 2020 with individual cases reported in Thailand and elsewhere.

By March 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) had declared COVID-19 a global health emergency and named the virus “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2”. It was also in March that WHO officially declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. In the early stages of the spread in infection, countries around the world took different approaches to manage COVID-19 and reduce the spread of the virus. Most countries adopted more or less strict lockdowns (encompassing stay-at-home orders, curfews, quarantines, cordons sanitaires and similar societal restrictions) with the significant exception of Sweden which undertook limited targeted measures such as protecting the elderly and the infirm. Strict lockdowns were precluded by insufficient state capacity in the poorer countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson spoke of common sense, ‘herd immunity’ and protecting the vulnerable. He initially rejected banning mass gatherings or imposing social distancing rules. Then, an unpublished alarmist March 16th report by Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London warned of 510,000 deaths in the country if the country did not immediately adopt a suppression strategy. On March 23rd, the UK Government reversed course and imposed one of Europe’s strictest lockdowns. For the US, the professor had predicted 2.2 million deaths absent similar government controls, and there too, Ferguson’s fearful predictions of mass deaths helped move the US federal government into lockdown mode.

Unlike climate change models that predict outcomes over a period of decades, however, it takes only days and weeks for epidemiological model forecasts to be falsified by data. Furthermore, by including all extreme weather (whether heavy snowfalls or heatwaves, droughts or floods) as results of an all-encompassing ‘climate change’, nothing could be disproven.

But the COVID-19 hobgoblins could not provide cover for Professor Ferguson’s hysterical conjectures. Thus, by March 25th, Ferguson’s predicted half a million fatalities in the UK was adjusted downward to “unlikely to exceed 20,000”, a reduction by a factor of 25. This drastic reduction could not be credibly explained by UK’s lockdown measures which had been imposed only two days previously, before any such measures could possibly have had enough time to work.

The Corruption of Science

While the climate and COVID-19 hobgoblins may be of different genres, they share much in common. They share striking parallels in the corruption of science, with the use of models whether they be of a bogus global warming hockey-stick or runaway epidemiological fatality predictions. This inordinate dependence on speculative, not-fit-for-purpose models betray the lack of transparency and groupthink, which involves the suppression of sceptics who question the imaginary hobgoblins.

A recent victim of the groupthink censorship is the highly eminent public health specialist Dr Jay Bhattacharya who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration which criticised the wholesale adoption of rigid lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nominated by President Trump as the next head of the National Institutes of Health, he has undergone four years of censorship, blacklisting and vilification. Dr John Clauser, who disputes the ‘climate crisis’ narrative, was similarly cancelled. He was disinvited by the IMF from a talk he was supposed to deliver and was subject to hit pieces in the mainstream media.

In the early days of the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK, former Supreme Court Justice Jonathan Sumption denounced the country’s “hysterical slide into a police state. … An irrational overreaction driven by fear”. He went on to masterfully describe the role of hysteria in politics:

The real problem is that when human societies lose their freedom, it’s not usually because tyrants have taken it away. It’s usually because people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. And the threat is usually a real threat but usually exaggerated. That’s what I fear we are seeing now. The pressure on politicians has come from the public. They want action. They don’t pause to ask whether the action will work. They don’t ask themselves whether the cost will be worth paying. They want action anyway. And anyone who has studied history will recognise here the classic symptoms of collective hysteria. Hysteria is infectious. We are working ourselves up into a lather in which we exaggerate the threat and stop asking ourselves whether the cure may be worse than the disease.

Hobgoblins Fade, People Wake Up

Much as people want protection from imaginary hobgoblins and their perceived threats, when governments turn tyrannical and pursue policies which cost far more than they benefit, people eventually undergo a process of disillusionment with a yearning for meaningful change. Regimes in power in turn double down on hysteria and panic-driven policies to keep the hobgoblins at bay. This causes even further impoverishment and alienation among larger sections of the population.

Rather than allocating resources and efforts towards protecting the vulnerable from COVID-19 while allowing the rest of the population to carry on with their livelihoods with individuals taking responsibility for safe socialising, most governments imposed top-down, economy-crushing lockdowns followed by mandates and exhortations to wear masks and take vaccinations and endless booster shots. And rather than mitigating real environmental threats such as ensuring water reservoirs are filled and forests are managed to safeguard against fires in California for example, the climate change establishment advocates further ‘decarbonisation’ (read deindustrialisation) to save us from extreme scenarios of global warming.

The triumphant return of Donald Trump as the 47th president of the US was the culmination of that process of disillusionment. The hobgoblins of COVID-19 and climate no longer seemed to hold sway. Rather, more people than not preferred to believe in, and vote for, a leader that dismissed the ‘climate crisis’ as a hoax and who was willing to give succour to those that refused COVID-19 vaccinations despite being threatened with the loss of jobs and ordinary freedoms.

On the first day of his administration, President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders which promise to end hysteria over fearful narratives. In the areas of energy, environment and the so-called ‘climate crisis’, President Trump has instructed his administration to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, reopen Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, temporarily withdraw all areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing, review the federal Government’s leasing and permitting practices for wind projects, declare a national energy emergency, stop radical environmentalism by “putting people over fish” to provide water to southern California; and put ‘America First’ in international environmental agreements.

With respect to issues related to COVID-19 and public health, the most consequential move Mr. Trump made in his election campaign was to unite forces with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who initially ran as an independent, and to nominate him as his next Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. On his first day, he issued an executive order to withdraw from the World Health Organisation. He also promised to “reinstate any service members who were unjustly expelled from our military for objecting to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate with full back pay”.

At his 1933 Presidential Inauguration, Franklin D. Roosevelt asserted his firm belief that “the only thing we have to fear is… fear itself”. Imaginary hobgoblins, threatening as they are, do fade away as people realise the truth.

Dr. Tilak K. Doshi is an economist, a former contributor to Forbes, and a member of the CO2 Coalition.


This article (Government by Hysteria: The Climate and Covid Hobgoblins Begin to Fade) was created and published by Daily Sceptic and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Tilak Doshi

*****

RELATED

Britain’s net zero, green energy madness is set for a head-on collision with reality

We are de-industrialising. The jobs, business, money – and emissions – simply go elsewhere

MATT RIDLEY

Britain’s net zero plan is to nearly double the demand for electricity (for heating, transport and artificial intelligence) and switch off most of the supply (gas and much of nuclear). If you think that does not add up, you are right. Perhaps Ed (Miliwatt-hour) Miliband is deliberately showing Keir (Starter-Motor) Starmer how barmy the plan is because this week the policy came unstuck – perhaps for good – in six different ways.

First Sir Keir had to watch Donald (Drill Baby Drill) Trump tear up electric-vehicle mandates and turn decisively against wind power. America, China and India are all going to increase their emissions by much more than we can possibly save. Not that wind power actually saves much anyway when a 2-megawatt wind turbine requires 1300 tonnes of concrete and 300 tonnes of steel.

Second, Starmer may have watched the Senate confirmation hearings of my good friend Chris Wright as America’s energy secretary. Wright’s innovations pretty well invented the shale revolution, turning America into now the world’s biggest producer of both oil and gas, ahead of even Saudi Arabia and Russia. That could have been our boom too. When Wright testified in the UK parliament in 2014 he said Britain had a fantastic opportunity to be a huge producer of shale gas, bigger than the original North Sea boom, but only if we stopped footling around. Yet Miliwatt-hour has now even shut down even conventional drilling in the North Sea.

Third, Starmer may have nervously checked the wind speeds and noticed that on the calm morning of “Dunkelflaute” Wednesday this week just 1 per cent of our electricity came from wind power, even less from solar and a whopping 10 per cent had to be imported at exorbitant cost to prevent the lights going out. How’s that for “energy security”? Norwegians are increasingly fed up with having to supply our power so this is not, to coin a phrase, sustainable.

Fourth, Miliwatt-hour’s deputy, Torsten (Alarm) Bell MP, told a massive inexactitude from the despatch box: “Unless we deliver secure, home-grown renewable energy through cheap renewable generation, there is no energy security ahead”. Cheap? The owners of gas turbines and even diesel generators are licking their lips at the panicky price spikes that now come regularly when the wind fails. The wind business nowadays expects £85 a megawatt hour for power from offshore wind, well above the price of getting it from gas – and then we must add billions to our bills for expanding, backing up and balancing the increasingly stretched and unstable grid that comes with wind. Unreliables are not cheaper than reliables however often Bell and Miliwatt claim they are.

Fifth, Sir Chris Stark (Staring Bonkers), the chief exec of the far-left Climate Change Committee, told a Commons committee that he does not believe projections of how much power the artificial intelligence industry and its data centres will need – and also that he plans to put data centres near where the power is generated. The idea that Google Deep Mind will relocate to the Moray Firth is for the birds (those that haven’t been chopped up by wind turbines). As for demand, Sam Bowman of Works in Progress points out that the US state of Georgia alone, with 11 million people, is planning for 20 gigawatts of extra demand in the next four years to cope with AI. Our total peak demand in the UK is 60 gigawatts. Britain’s hitherto fabulous strength in AI is being strangled by net zero.

Sixth, Jim Ratcliffe, the boss of Ineos, said on 13 January: “We are witnessing the extinction of one of our major industries as chemical manufacture has the life squeezed out of it” by high energy prices. De-industrialising Britain, he added, achieves nothing for the environment and merely shifts emissions, business and jobs elsewhere.

Britain’s experiment in virtue-signalling to the world that we are leaders in net zero ambitions has been a risible farce. We have achieved: the highest electricity prices of any developed country; falling electricity usage; the loss of major industries; a worrying dependence on energy imports; a dangerous risk of blackouts; an impending net reduction in nuclear power; net zero impact on global emissions; and net zero influence. Even Rachel (From Complaints) Reeves appears now to realise that growth means abandoning net zero.

The Telegraph: continue reading

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*