On Monday, it was announced in the Toronto Star, with some glee, that Canada and Japan had managed to block the rest of the "G7" executives, or leaders of a defined part of the "free" world, from pursuing an initiative against "global warming."
The leaders of the two nations had successfully watered down the text of a statement that would have suggested that this particular subset of the world's many nations would lead in the de-industrialization of the world. That would be disguised as preventing "climate change", but there is no doubt, as I wrote most entertainingly last October, that the purpose was to grind industry to a halt.
The Canadians and the Japanese, at least their leadership, appear to have recognized a few things. One is that for the G7 to decide to tell the rest of the 200+ countries what they can and cannot do is rather pompous. Another is that the non-represented nations, like the Russians, the Chinese and the Indians, are as likely to cut their fossil fuel consumption as I am to wake up six feet tall in the morning.
Finally, our Japanese and Canadian colleagues clearly looked at the idea of the G7 nations compromising our economies for the sake of a couple degrees of temperature over a hundred years (aside: God has done that Himself plenty of times; not too long ago Scotland had grapes growing in areas inhospitably cold to them today), and said "No, thanks." I suspect they also said something, hopefully out loud, to Barack Obama, like "Sure, Barry; we'll kill our industry and gut our own nations in the hope that the Chinese, Russians and Indians will follow. Kind of like your negotiating with Iran, isn't it? Hope as a strategy, eh? How's that working out?"
I just wonder what the citizens of the G7 countries are thinking as they observe that spectacle. Angela Merkel, who leads Germany, was actually the outwardly driving force behind this G7 global warming charade. Do we think that the average German is comfortable converting his Mercedes to solar power so China can stay cooler in 2097? No, I don't either.
Obviously, we won't get a statement from the Canadian delegation in regard to their brave action stalling this nonsense. So we don't necessarily know why they opposed the initiative, and we probably aren't going to hear about it.
But I would really, really like to hear from the Canadian leader, the prime minister Stephen Harper and, since I doubt we will, here is the speech I'd like to hear:
"As you are aware, during this week's G7 Summit, the topic of global warming was raised, and what we, as the leading industrialized nations, could do about it. I don't want to get into the science of it; rather, I wanted to note that I attended the summit as the representative of Canada, and to promote and defend the interests of the people who have elected me to office.
"It is my firm belief that the purpose of all the ruckus about global warming is an attempt by the troglodyte faction of the world's leftists, to slow down and ultimately destroy the economy of Western nations, to the presumed relative benefit of other large and some poorer countries. Neither I, nor the people of Canada who rely on fossil fuels, believe it wise to sit idly by and allow this obstructionist movement to prevent our country's economic development.
"More importantly, there can be only two outcomes of continued production and consumption of fossil fuels -- the global average temperature will rise, or it won't. If it does not, then every anti-industrial, counter-productive step we have taken will have been for no gain, and we will have riled up the populace for nothing.
"If indeed the temperature does rise, then outside of Russia it is hard to imagine a country which would benefit more than Canada. We have a tremendous land mass which could produce an agricultural bounty the world has never seen, if only it weren't so blasted cold up there, eh? No single action could aid the world more in feeding its hungry than were Canada to be warm enough to support a much larger variety of agricultural products.
"Accordingly, I have acted in the best interest of my country -- and, serendipitously, the hungry of the world -- by acting to stop any movement on the part of my poor, misguided peers to keep the globe cool. I trust that my fellow Canadians will honour me with their support in this position."
I have to say, as many Canadians as it has been my privilege to know over the years, I'd have to think that, were Mr. Harper to make that speech, glasses would be raised from Vancouver to Halifax and up to Inuvik, all saluting his belief in putting his nation first.
And either way, Barack Obama will crawl back to the USA wondering why no one follows him.
Copyright 2015 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here? There's a new post from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am Eastern time, every weekday, giving new meaning to "prolific essayist."
No comments:
Post a Comment