The New Fascists

I hate to sound like I’m overstating things, but we really are living in scary times. It’s not just that our current administration is pushing the country toward a statist path, there are many others trying to institute a world government using the excuse of “climate change”. They are trying to get a treaty written in Copenhagen for signing in December. They know they need to hurry because people are becoming more aware of what a sham the whole AGW premise is. The public has lost interest in it as a threat and people are seeing that the world is getting colder, not warmer.

This world government is being set up to monitor every aspect of people’s lives. Mark Steyn explains what a sickening prospect the whole thing is here.

Meanwhile, in the states, they are trying to put all kinds of food fascist nonsense in the health care bills. One of the things in there is a demand for calorie counts on all menus and ending machines. You might say, so what? Well, that is how they always start. First they set up the premise that something is bad for you, then they start banning it on that basis. I am old enough to remember when “no smoking” was a recommendation. They asked people politely. Now you can’t smoke anywhere except in special zones and rooms.

You may say again, “So? Smoking is bad for you. Second hand smoke kills.” Yes, smoking is bad for you over a long period of time. But second hand smoke has never been proven to be bad for you, but you would never know that from the government propaganda. I am not endorsing smoking, but they will go after the things you like eventually because control freaks never tire of ruining other people’s pleasures.

Eco nazis want everyone to stop eating meat. Right now they’re recommending it, but believe me, when they get the power to do so, they will start demanding it.

That is what the new fascist are, the nanny staters. Unlike the old fascists, they don’t come at you with a gun, they try to make you agree to their control using guilt and scare tactics.

We simply can’t let them win. We’re at the point where we either fight back or face a very unpleasant future ruled by evil imbeciles.

Loading Facebook Comments ...

8 Comments

  1. I’m not really in favor of a nanny state at all. On the other hand, speaking from a non-legislative perspective, there a re a lot of things that should be discussed in forums, like the fact that giant factory farms are, by and large, not very good at all for the environment.

    Can we agree on that?

    Keep in mind, I love steak, chicken, bacon, the works, but I am aware that the way most large companies get it to the market is not a good idea. I’m not suggesting we legislate it, but, rather, find better, more eco-friendly ways of doing business, and do what we can (whether we are customers, consumer groups, businesspeople, stockholders, or board members) to persuade companies to do the right thing. Things like letter-writing campaigns, nonprofit groups, and petitions can work, if handled properly. I’d argue that a request for change would be more likely listened to by customers than by lobbyists looking to legislate a company into doing something.

    I think this is the key issue, beyond politics and legislation: many companies (small and large) do not think in the long-term, which can bring them harm. You see it nowadays with large banks and investment firms that have collapsed, you see it in land developers who continue to make ridiculously large homes further and further out from the burbs who now have trouble selling them, and you see it in a lot of petroleum companies, who should really be at the forefront in alternative energy research and development, as they have the most money to pursue it, and the most to gain (or lose). Granted, some of these companies do have a brain and at least throw a little cash towards R & D, but many do not (or not very much).

    The central problem is that most work off this business formula:

    profit right now > all else.

    We live in a world were the quarterly reports are the end-all, be-all of a company’s strength and they shouldn’t be.

    This is why Warren Buffett does so well: he looks to the long term, plans ahead, does his research (or, has the research done for him), and acts conscientiously. And, with few exceptions (like this past year), he always does exceedingly well.

  2. That analysis of business is misinformed by leftist cant. Yes, many businesses behave that way, just as many people behave badly. Does that mean all people behave badly?

    Farming is a science that is constantly evolving, just as energy studies are. We may started out using coal and oil, but we’re evolving as our understandings evolve, The same with factory farming. People are finding better ways to do it, while that happens, some will do it wrong or badly. That’s how people learn. When government comes in and tells people what they can or cannot do they are really stranding in the way of progress.

    Factory farming feeds millions of people. I prefer local farming, but I would like to see factory farming improve their methods, not be banned as some want.

    What a lot of people fail to understand or get is, a lot of what politicians do is at the behest of their backers. In other words, government kills technologies and research that rich competitors want shut down.

    The truth is we could have had cars with 100 MPG in the 70s. We knew how to do it them. But that would have denied states tax revenues if gas consumption went down. The whole situation is a lot more complex than people get. And frankly, the system is really corrupt. When Dems run around screaming about corrupt capitalists, take it with a grain of salt. THEY are worse.

  3. “That analysis of business is misinformed by leftist cant. Yes, many businesses behave that way, just as many people behave badly. Does that mean all people behave badly?”

    Of course all businesses, like people, are not inherently bad, devious, or what have you. I, myself, am a contractor. One of my main points is that there are a lot of businesses (and, really, people as well) that do things detrimental to themselves and others.

    I also said that making up new laws and “nannying” up our legal system is a bad idea, too.

    My sole suggestion is that we, the consumers and stockholders, should voice our objections when processes and practices demand it. In the end, the “bosses” of companies aren’t CEOs – they’re the consumers and stockholders. When they leave, the game’s over. Folks who used to work at CIrcuit City can tell you that.

    “Farming is a science that is constantly evolving, just as energy studies are. We may started out using coal and oil, but we’re evolving as our understandings evolve, The same with factory farming. People are finding better ways to do it, while that happens, some will do it wrong or badly. That’s how people learn. When government comes in and tells people what they can or cannot do they are really stranding in the way of progress.”

    Agreed.

    “Factory farming feeds millions of people. I prefer local farming, but I would like to see factory farming improve their methods, not be banned as some want.”

    Same here. Once again, not asking to see it banned – just run better and safer. The government doesn’t need to be involved, in my opinion – consumers (real consumers) can mobilize and probably get better results than a PETA lobbyist going after congress support.

    As to my whole R & D point, I figure this: Sony knows that it has to come out with something “bigger and better” every few years, in terms of entertainment (BluRay, Playstation 3, etc.), as does Microsoft (Windows 7, Office, XBox 360, Internet Explorer, etc.). Granted, none of those are commodities, but, if you know your one product (which IS a commodity) has a finite source, and that you will, eventually, run out of it, why wouldn’t you spend as much as you could afford on the Next Big Thing, especially when you have the capital to make and market the Next Big Thing in a way that you (and maybe a few other entities) can corner the market the same way you do now? It’s not some radical business notion or anything.

  4. As the government gets more and more entangled with business through over-regulation we’re seeing the rise of what economists call “perverse incentives.” British Petroleum is at the forefront of several types of renewable energy. Why would an oil company do this? Several reasons. By playing the “environmental good citizen card” they deflect attention from themselves during the next round of political assaults on the eeeeevil oil companies. Also, huge government subsidies are available for developing “renewable” energy sources. Results are optional. Finally, by cozying up to the government, they get special treatment when the government chooses who will get large government contracts.
    This sort of thing is why Wal-Mart and Big Pharma caved to the Obama Administration. They saw the writing on the wall and realized if they were going to be controlled by the government anyway, why not get preferred status by preemptive surrender?
    Even better, this all but eliminates the ability of smaller competitors to be, well, competitive. This was one of the motivations behind the big tobacco companies agreeing to the MSA. Smaller companies could not possibly afford to sign on, so they were eliminated.

  5. “British Petroleum is at the forefront of several types of renewable energy. Why would an oil company do this? Several reasons. By playing the “environmental good citizen card” they deflect attention from themselves during the next round of political assaults on the eeeeevil oil companies. Also, huge government subsidies are available for developing “renewable” energy sources. Results are optional. Finally, by cozying up to the government, they get special treatment when the government chooses who will get large government contracts.”

    One extra point: assuming that there is a finite amount of oil on this planet, is it not prudent to look for future energy products in larger (if not renewable) stores? I’d argue there’s a lot of pragmatic self-reliance in researching alternative energies, especially if you’re in a market that will eventually dry up.

    Side note: I do not think of oil companies (or any company, for that matter) as “evil,” just as I don’t think of guns as “evil.” Both are vessels which, depending upon the controller, can be used in a positive, negative, or neutral fashion.

  6. WebD,

    Peak Oil is not even relevant at this point despite what the hysterics say, but regardless, they are not serious about renewable energy because they keep blocking nuclear power. NP is a clean source of energy that we have an almost endless supply of fuel of and the technology has been proven safe for 60 some odd years. Only Chernobyl is the bad example, and that was using an unsafe reactor design. Our safety record and Europe’s is pretty much unblemished (Three Mile Island did no harm). We are also constantly looking for new and better energy sources. But for now, Coal, Oil and Nuclear deliver the most bang for the buck. That’s just a simple fact.

    http://reason.com/archives/2009/11/10/how-green-are-your-nukes

  7. “But for now, Coal, Oil and Nuclear deliver the most bang for the buck.”

    I’d argue nuclear is leaps and bounds better than coal and oil, but maybe that’s just me. I have a friend with a bit of work history in forestry and conservation who swears by nuclear power, much to the chagrin of many dirty, dirty hippies. But that’s their problem. When you hear some folks talk about trees as if they are sad-but-adorable orphaned children, you wonder how they got this far in life. But I digress….

    And, true, peak oil isn’t coming this week or even this year; just suggesting that the more R & D done as ahead of the curve as possible, the better for the company itself and its consumers. If I had a few billion dollars in the bank (i.e. disposable business-related income), and made it selling an important commodity like oil, I’d be putting a ridiculous amount into R & D for continued future success. Then again, maybe I’m just odd.

  8. Nuclear is a great option but oil has everything beat, See chart.

    http://www.threesources.com/ncmo01.gif

    I will say we keep discovering huge fields of oil. In fact we have more in the US than Saudi Arabia but the Dems won’t allow drilling. Not just in Alaska, North Dakota and some other fields. Oil is a plentiful resource. When you hear about “oil reserves” all that means is oil we know about. There are vast regions of the globe still unexplored for oil due to politics, mostly and cost.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *