Here’s the latest from the fruit salad, over at The Independent:
The most progressive US president in a generation comes to the most important international meeting since the Second World War and delivers a speech so devoid of substance that he might as well have made it on speaker-phone from a beach in Hawaii. His aides argue in private that he had no choice, such is the opposition on Capitol Hill to any action that could challenge the dominance of fossil fuels in American life. And so the nation that put a man on the Moon can’t summon the collective will to protect men and women back here on Earth from the consequences of an economic model and lifestyle choice that has taken on the mantle of a religion.
I’m long on record of opposing the idiocy of inappropriate comparisons of the crisis du jour to Apollo. Is he really comparing a massive technological achievement of engineering to “summoning a collective will” (i.e., social engineering)? Apparently.
And when it comes to “taking on the mantle of a religion,” I can only suggest that he and his gaze long into a mirror.
Rand, the watermelons and their ilk have never understood the difference between fantasies such as “social engineering” and actual engineering.
That fact goes a long way to explaining why they try to treat both as equivalent, and why, when “social engineering” was shown to be a horrid death-cult myth with the implosion of the Soviet regime, the response among Western “liberals” was to band together with the watermelons, to the purpose of banning real engineering, through ever-more-stringent regulatory hurdles.