After all, in his current article posted at both The Nation and Counterpunch, Cockburn indirectly castigated his own readers as he accused the left of having “been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism by the weight of the global emergency.”
Powerful stuff to publish in one of the most liberal magazines in the country, wouldn’t you agree?
Strap your seatbelts tightly, for Cockburn was hunting alarmists, and came loaded for bear (emphasis added throughout):
We should never be more vigilant than at the moment a new dogma is being installed. The claque endorsing what is now dignified as "the mainstream theory" of global warming stretches all the way from radical greens through Al Gore to George W. Bush, who signed on at the end of May. The left has been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism by the weight of the global emergency. Amid the collapse of genuinely radical politics, they have seen it as the alarm clock prompting a new Great New Spiritual Awakening.
[…]
The marquee slogan in the new cold war on global warming is that the scientific consensus is virtually unanimous. This is utterly false. The overwhelming majority of climate computer modelers, the beneficiaries of the $2 billion-a-year global warming grant industry, certainly believe in it but not necessarily most real climate scientists-people qualified in atmospheric physics, climatology and meteorology.
Can you imagine any of the folks at The Nation supporting such statements, in particular its editor Katrina vanden Heuvel?
Makes one wonder why they’re publishing this stuff, doesn’t it?
