Global Warming: An Instrument of Deception, Transformation and Subjugation

Let me state right from the onset I am not an anti-environmentalist bent on allowing industry to poison our air, pollute our waters, degrade our forests, deplete our natural resources, or in general harm our shared planet. I have walked in old-growth forest here in the United States and have been in the rainforests of Honduras, and have a keen appreciation for the role that natural surroundings have on mankind. They are truly a blessing. Nor am I an outright “denier” of global warming/climate change. I do not believe the IPCC to be a pernicious organization bent on the destruction of Western society, nor do I believe the scientists and members of the IPCC to be inherently corrupt people who are intentionally hatching a plan to deceive the whole of humanity. However, I do make the following contentions that I will examine in depth over the course of my next several blogs:

1. The nature, design, and execution of the climate treaty being considered in Copenhagen, as well as cap and trade legislation violate the letter of the Constitution and the sprit of United States sovereignty.
2. The manner in which global warming has been researched, presented and embraced is laced with fundamentalism and uses fear tactics to exploit a gullible and ill-informed public, which is a clear danger to rational thought and exposition and threatens to undermine political dissention and rob science of its objective lens.
3. There is no clear consensus among the scientific community regarding global warming, despite claims to the contrary.
4. There are many more pressing issues the world community needs to address before global warming casing energy, time and resources to be diverted.
5. The use of a cap and trade system will neither: reduce carbon emissions appreciably, modulate global warming, or benefit third-world countries, although it may very likely do harm to both established and fledgling economies, falling disproportionably among the most vulnerable, even as it simultaneously lines the pockets of energy-sector corporate elitists and further disconnects consumers from their energy use.
6. The key to both safeguarding the Earth as well as ensuring prosperity and movement toward economic parity must take into account the motivators of human behaviors or change will never be sustainable.

INTERNATIONAL CAP AND TRADE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

As it is presently being conducted, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton being used a diplomatic proxy to negotiate international climate regulations, violates the United States Constitution. According to Article I, Section 8, Congress may “regulate Commerce with foreign nations,” not the President. The President is however, under Article II, Section 2, allowed to make treaties, but only “provided two thirds of the Senators present concur,” which is far different scenario than an ambassador deciding our national fate. As Alexander Hamilton points out in the Federalist Papers: “the qualities elsewhere detailed as indispensable in the management of foreign negotiations, point out the Executive as the most fit agent in those transactions; while the vast importance of the trust, and the operation of treaties as laws, plead strongly for the participation of the whole or a portion of the legislative body in the office of making them.” (Federalist 75). This is a profound and direct example of a robust system of checks and balances purposely interwoven throughout the Constitution and aimed at undermining the excesses of unmitigated power possessed by English monarchy. As James Madison advocated by echoing the words of the prominent social philosopher Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu: "There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates.” (Federalist, 47). This does not mean all branches abdicate all sense of province or authority, but are subject to rational inspection and deliberation. At this point, of course, no such violation has occurred. But should Secretary Clinton be authorized to sign a future agreement of commerce in Copenhagen, we will once again have undermined fundamental tenets of our Constitution. And, even if Congress would approve this treaty, I believe it would be a violation of the public welfare, given the on-going level of suppression endured by those who hold opposing points-of-view. As one of our prominent founding fathers, John Jay noted: “It surely does not follow, that because they have given the power of making laws to the legislature, that therefore they should likewise give them the power to do every other act of sovereignty by which the citizens are to be bound and affected.” (Federalist, 64) When government acts without the consent of the people, we no longer have a true representative democracy. In the case of global warming legislation, government functions as an elitist, self-serving body that foments anger and derision amongst the masses as surreptitiously embraces a pseudo-scientific fundamentalism and runs roughshod over it citizens. More on this in my next installment: Global Warming is a Form of Fundamentalism.