Canada’s Prime Minister prattles on what is supposedly World Health Day (and we defy you to say the date without Googling) that “The overlapping crises of conflict, climate, food and nutrition insecurity, and the continued impact of COVID-19 are making it even harder for people to get the health services they need.” Never mind that life expectancy is soaring and malnutrition, extreme poverty and deaths from natural disasters are plummeting. Facts be hanged, every topic is now climate change and it’s all bad. If they drop their guard they’ll praise “A vibrant, sun-drenched island” (that was Bing). But everyone who’s anyone knows it’s a catastrophe and it’s all we should talk about. And if you make the mistake of thinking otherwise, prepare to be told, over dinner if need be. Katharine Hayhoe wrote a few years back in a piece called “I was an Exxon-funded climate scientist” that while cashing their evil cheques “Fresh out of Canada, I was unaware that there were people who didn’t accept climate science – so unaware, in fact, that it was nearly half a year before I realized I’d married one”. One can’t help but wonder what her new husband felt upon learning what every other dinner conversation was going to be about. Though perhaps we can, having discovered the dreary monotony of every other newspaper article and every other utterance from every government official being about the same topic.
Even when trying to tempt its readers with an expensive guide to wine, The Economist panders to their sense of sophistication with:
“First published in 1971, this has been the wine world’s bible ever since. That world has changed: drinkers’ tastes and winemakers’ techniques have evolved; winemaking regions are under threat from climate change.”
Climate change you see, not bureaucratic regulations in Italy, France and Spain, which together account for 53% of world wine production and where a decision to restrict production in 2020 and force up prices meant wine producers couldn’t take advantage of good weather and had to let fruit rot on the ground.
No, winemakers are “under threat” from climate change, which could make it wetter, drier, warmer, cooler, windier or what have you. It hasn’t yet, mind you, but when it does, you can be sure, it will be worse for the sort of wine Economist readers prefer, whether it’s “Champagne that matches fish and chips” or “a cabernet from Coonawarra”. And when arguing against discarding exams at universities, that same publication opines that:
“Tests correctly measure educational inequality, which begins before kindergarten and grows as a result of bad policy. Just as smashing thermometers does not prevent climate change, so abandoning the measurement of educational inequality will not magic it away.”
Not for them the observation that placing thermometers at airports doesn’t cause climate change.
Similarly, National Geographic reports on a decision by the Norwegian government not to dig up a recently-discovered Viking burial ship so future researchers could dig it up, but then moans:
“Thanks to an agricultural ditch dug in the 1960s and increasingly hotter, drier weather due to climate change, however, parts of the ship above the keel protruded above the protective water bath that had kept the ship’s wood oxygen-free and intact for more than a thousand years.”
Right. A drainage ditch and climate change. And Thor only knows which really drained the water.
Meanwhile, in ordering Canadian museums to become more woke than a can of Bud Light in the hopes of ridding them of all those noisy, pesky visitors, guess what gets thrown into the pit of contemporary fragments?
“Museums are too ‘colonial’ and must educate Canadians on ‘climate change, equity, diversity and inclusion,’ says a Department of Canadian Heritage report. Traditional exhibits are too mainstream and fail to ‘take into consideration important societal shifts,’ it said. ‘Museums are colonial institutions,’ said the report Renewal Of The Canadian Museum Policy. ‘Museums are part of the colonial legacy.’ Cabinet has ordered revisions to a 1990 Museum Policy used as a guide by some 2,700 exhibitors, art galleries and heritage groups that rely on federal funding. ‘Canada’s museums are at a crossroads,’ said the report. ‘The 1990 policy does not take into consideration important societal shifts such as reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, addressing issues of equity, diversity and inclusion or the ongoing digital transformation,’ wrote the department. ‘As a trusted source of information, museums can help educate the public and encourage debate on issues such as climate change, equity, diversity and inclusion.’”
Now debate is a word here meaning “lack of debate”, of course. The idea is not to have people going “Gee, is canceling all non-woke views really diverse?” or “Is creating organizations for one race only really inclusive?” or “Hasn’t climate always changed?”
The funny thing is, these are the sort of people who also take for granted that they and their like-minded cohort are outside-the-box thinkers.