Periodically, proposals are raised for some kind of international taxes that are supposed to be justified by threats to the environment and by mythical global warming concerns. Several years ago, for example, ideas were floated for imposing special taxes on international flights, the revenue of which would go to saving nature. The very latest idea is levying a tax on oil, which will raise $740 billion that will go to… yes… saving nature. In tune with the current fetishizing of FDR, it’s being called a Green New Deal.
So, the problems: This is to be done somehow through the UN. The article was skimpy on details for just how this tax is to be imposed, collected, and under whose authority, but I take it it’s through the UN. The United Nations is not a taxing authority and it has neither the legal authority to do so nor the political justification. A sovereign people would be fools to allow a tax to be put on them by some extralegal entity over which they have no control. My political representation in the UN is tangential at best and the bulk of the members and the bulk of bureaucracy do not have my nation’s interests at heart. Any kind of international tax like this sets a precedent by which the UN can slowly exert greater powers while not being answerable to any population. It would be the creation of a sovereign without even the benefit of a social contract. What’s galling – and frightening – is that there exist people who see no problems with such plans and actually think them good. Throw into this mix the UN’s proficiency at corruption, e.g. Oil for Food, and there’s no telling where or in whose pockets much of this money would wind up being depositied.
As if these international technocrats weren’t bad enough, we have our own in the U.S. NASA’s James Hansen recently complained that the democratic process just isn’t working for him.
The democratic process doesn’t quite seem to be working. … The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is greenwash. The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.
Absolutely amazing. The implication here, even if Hansen is coy about drawing it out, is that sticking to democracy is likely to doom the world. Presumably, the solution is ditching democracy, at least temporarily, in order to fix the environment (like China and its environmental successes, I suppose). This illustrates the threat of crises that so many don’t want to waste in order to further their own agendas. The White House wants to exploit the economic crisis to institute sweeping liberal policies and many of the green lobbies are determined to exploit a non-existent crisis in order to increase their own power and those of fellow technocrats. The rest of us will be forced to be free and to go along with what our more intelligent superiors dictate. And our liberties will be sacrificed in the process.
A friend recommended your site to me. Glad he did, as it looks very worthwhile. Looking forward to learning lots here. Lance
Comment by cheap diamond dental burs — 4/20/2009 @ 12:47 am