Sunday, May 19, 2024
HomeKathy GyngellShock news! The Telegraph publishes Jordan Peterson's rallying cry on globalist doomsters

Shock news! The Telegraph publishes Jordan Peterson’s rallying cry on globalist doomsters


IN WHAT I think must be a first for the usually ‘conspiracy’-shy Telegraph, the once right-of-centre newspaper that’s been so reluctant to call out the globalist vaccine authoritarians has published an article by Jordan Peterson attacking their first cousins, the globalist peddlers of environmental doom

Here is what Peterson had to say, expressing views which, to date, have been shared only on alternative social media outlets.

Under the headline ‘Peddlers of environmental doom have shown their true totalitarian colours’and the strapline ‘Corporations and utopians are offering authoritarian solutions to crises only democracy and free markets can solve’, Peterson homes in on the damage done by just one of the corporate behemoths to have ‘assumed the role as counsellors to believers in unchecked globalisation whose policies have sparked considerable unrest around the world’.

He pulls no punches: ‘If you’re seeking the cause of the Dutch agriculture and fisheries protests, the Canadian trucker convoy, the yellow-jackets in France, the farmer rebellion in India a few years ago, the recent catastrophic collapse of Sri Lanka, or the energy crisis in Europe and Australia, you can instruct yourself by the recent pronouncements from Deloitte’ which ‘offer an insight into the elite groupthink that has triggered these events; into the cabal of utopians operating in the media, corporate and government fronts, wielding a nightmarish vision of environmental apocalypse.’

He lists the outlandish claims such corporates make, as in the case ofDeloitte earlier this year which ‘released a clarion call to precipitous action trumpeting the climate emergency confronting us’.  The Turning Point: A Global Summary by Deloitte, he writes, ‘is a stellar example of a mentality more common among officials in the EU: one of fundamental bureaucratic overreach’. 

He describes how the report opens with two claims: first, that the storms, wildfires, droughts, downpours, and floods around the globe in the last 18 months are unique and unprecedented – a dubious claim, he says, and one which we at TCW  have consistently challenged.  

What these outfits are implicitly asserting, he says, (he doesn’t mention the BBC who were first to claim this) is that ‘the “science” is now at a point where we can say without doubt that experts can and must model the entire ecology and economy of the planet (!) and that we must modify everyone’s behaviour, by hook or by crook, to avoid what would otherwise be the most expensive environmental and social catastrophe in history’.

The Deloitte ‘models’, he reports, posit that ‘climate impacts’ could affect global economic output; saying for example that unchecked climate change will cost us $178trillion over the next 50 years, or $25,000 per person.

He asks who dares deny such facts, stated so mathematically? So precisely? So scientifically? Well, Jordan, plenty in fact. The Global Warming Policy Foundation, Net Zero Watch and hundreds, if not thousands, of reputable and distinguished scientists and commentators. The problem is that they are largely excluded by the mainstream media and banned by the BBC.

Peterson goes on: ‘No real scientist says “follow the science”. Yet this is exactly what bodies such as the EU consistently pronounce, pushing for collectivist solutions that do more harm than good.’

That is the key point. How have these private enterprises been corrupted by such fascist (I don’t think it is Marxist) ideology?

Truly valid structures of authority are local, not centralised for reasons of efficiency and ‘emergency’, he says. They will not solve our problems, just as similar attempts have failed to solve our problems in the past. Worse, their doom-mongering is not designed to solve problems – it is intended to create them and terrify us into submission.

Peterson asks: ‘Are these Deloitte models – which are supposed to guide all the important decisions we make about the economic security and opportunity of families and the structures of our civil societies – accurate enough even to give those who employ them any edge whatsoever, say, in predicting the performance of a stock portfolio (one based on green energy, for example) over the upcoming years?

‘The answer is no. How do we know? Because if such accurate models existed and were implemented by a company with Deloitte’s resources and reach, Deloitte would soon have all the money.’

This is where I part company from Peterson. His reasoning is naive. Deloitte does not have to be right or accurate to coin the money. With its huge government and corporate contracts it coins the money by being woke. Over and out.

When Peterson says that ‘the environment is simply too complex to model’, and that ‘the free market is the best model of the environment we can generate’, he is right on both counts.But since when did we have anything resembling a free market in this country when central banks all around the world (not just the Bank of England) are the ones pushing this green globalist agenda.

Peterson sayscitizens are waking up to this. Protests like those of the Dutch farmers and Canadian truckers are spreading and increasing in intensity. As they should. But are the masses really waking up in sufficient numbers? My impression is more that there is an epidemic of cognitive dissonance – people appear to be strangely accepting of everything.

After taking on his critics (half of me says why bother?) he comes back to a point of clear agreement that needs to be shouted from the rooftops: ‘There is simply no pathway forward to the green and equitable utopia that necessitates the further impoverishment of the already poor, the compulsion of the working class, or the sacrifice of economic security and opportunity on the food, energy and housing front. There is simply no pathway forward to the global utopia you hypothetically value that is dependent on force. And even if there was, what gives you the right to enforce your demands? On other sovereign citizens, equal in value to you?’

There is, he says, an alternative solution:

‘A better way forward would be to prioritise the problems that beset all of us on this still-green, functional and increasingly abundant planet with the requisite focus and attention demanded of a true political class, elected by the people, capable of and willing to look at everything, trying to fix where necessary, trying to maintain as much freedom and autonomy as possible, and stop simply capitalising narcissistically on the mere appearance of action, knowledge and virtue.

‘We should obtain true, co-operative consent from those affected – farmers, truckers, working-class people who have turned in irritated desperation to figures such as Donald Trump – and work with them, rather than forbidding them with your power or improving them so they will be finally worthy of your time and attention. Help replace dirty energy with clean, if you must, but do it on your own dime, and make sure that the results are cheap and plentiful, if you want to help the poor, and the planet.

‘The warning bells are ringing. Listen to them, before they turn into sirens.

‘We will not advance without resistance through the straits of your enforced privation. We will not allow you to steal and destroy the energy that makes our lives bearable (and that produces our food and shelter and housing and the sporadic delights of modern life) just to address your existential terror (particularly when it will fail to do so in any case). We will not allow our children to be criticised first for having the temerity to merely exist and then be deprived of the prosperous and opportunity-rich future we strived so hard to prepare for them. We remain unconvinced of your frightened and self-congratulatory moralising and intellectual pretension, ignorance of the limits of statistics, and misuse of arithmetic.

‘We do not believe, finally and most absolutely, that your declared emergency and the panic you sow because of it means that you should now be ceded all necessary authority.

So leave us alone, you centralisers; you worshippers of Gaia; you sacrificers of the wealth and property of others; you would-be planetary saviours; you Machiavellian pretenders and virtue-signallers, objecting to power, all the while you gather it around you madly.

‘Leave us alone, to prosper or not, as a result of our own choices; as a result of our own actions; in the exercise of our own requisite and irreducible responsibility.

‘Leave us alone. Or reap the whirlwind. And watch the terrible destruction of what you purport to save, in consequence.’

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Kathy Gyngell
Kathy Gyngell
Kathy is Editor of The Conservative Woman. She is @kathygyngelltcw on GETTR and is back on Twitter.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.