The dog-poop yogurt story: a warming to politicans on climate

The dog-poop yogurt story: a warming to politicans on climate, by James Delingpole. This is from 2011, when Mitt Romney was on his way to becoming the unsuccessful Republican standard-bearer in the US Presidential election of 2012. But nothing’s changed, really.

Mitt Romney didn’t understand this. He was under the unfortunate impression that [“climate change”] is one of those safe, bi-partisan issues where you can demonstrate how reasonable and electable you are by adopting an accommodating centrist position. And this is why, as Rush has correctly noted, his presidential aspirations are toast. …

The analogy:

OK, so imagine there are two types of people in the world. There are kind like me — and you, I would hope — who like to eat their yogurt plain or with bits of fruit in it. But there is also out there, another kind of person. Lets call them the Greens because that is who I mean. They want to change the world; they want to shake the status quo to its very foundations. They believe that if we carry on as we did before, cleaving to our decadent traditions and selfish, pleasure-seeking lifestyles, then the world will end. And that’s why, as part of the radical, hair-shirt lifestyle shifts we need to adopt if we are to save the planet, they believe the time has come to end our bourgeois, running-dog lackey addiction to unsustainable fruit-flavoured or plain yogurt. What we need to do instead is flavour our yogurt with something more bracing, more radical, more alternative, more organic; something besides which has the virtue of being as cheap and abundant as the wind and the sun: dog poop.

“But hang on”, say all we fruit- and plain-yogurt lovers. “There’s a reason why we eat our yogurt either plain or with fruit. And the reason is, it tastes nice. Whereas if you put dog poop in it, it will taste like ****.”

“Typical,” say the Greens. “We hear this from your side all the time. You’re too selfish to change your ways. You’re addicted to fruit. You want to stick your heads in the sand and ignore all the evidence that fruit and plain yogurt are unsustainable.”

“What evidence?”

“Well for a start look at the supermarkets. Every day they sell tubs and tubs of the stuff, feeding the public’s insatiable greed, encouraging reckless consumption of dairy produce which comes from cows which not only take up precious land which could otherwise be set aside for biofuels but which also produce methane — an even more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2. Whereas, we have strong evidence to suggest that if yogurt were flavoured with dog poop instead, consumption might fall dramatically, leading people to enjoy much more healthy lifestyles and reduce their addiction to dairy products.”

“Doesn’t sound very enjoyable to me.”

“Well it’s not about your enjoyment. It’s about the children.”

“I don’t think my kids want dog poop yogurt either.”

“Generations unborn then. And the polar bears. And the California Delta Smelt. You’re going to be telling me next you don’t care about the California Delta Smelt.”

“Well now you mention it…”

The lesson for politicians:

Which brings us to Mitt Romney. And all those other RINO type quasi-ecotards of his ilk who imagine, somehow, that by positioning themselves in the middle they’re going to achieve the kind of consensus that will keep everyone happy.

“Suppose,” Romney is saying, “We just put a tiny bit of dog poop in the yogurt and mix it up with the fruit and the plain. That would work, wouldn’t it?”

No it wouldn’t. And even if half our political class don’t yet understand why it wouldn’t, an increasing number of the people who vote for them very much can.

The public understand that if there is no remotely convincing, proven link between Anthropogenic CO2 emissions and catastrophic climate change then there is absolutely no point in politicians formulating major, economy-destroying, landscape-blighting, liberty-crushing, tax-raising policy decisions on the basis that there is. Period. …

[Climate] has become the liberal-left’s great proxy issue. Under the cloak of ecological righteousness, the liberal-left is seeking to advance its controlling agenda of income redistribution, property theft, taxation, regulation, government by democratically unaccountable activists and bureaucrats, state rationing and economic destruction, only couched in such a way as to make it seem caring and sensible and good.

Oddly enough, I couldn’t find a suitable picture to illustrate the analogy. Imagination required.

Stephen:

A brilliant analogy akin to the horse that is designed by a committee giving us a camel. Or the fact that you can’t be a little bit pregnant. Your either are or you aren’t. The having-a-bet-both-ways, squishy ‘conservatives’ in many ways are worse than the hair shirt lefties (who in reality probably wouldn’t be seen dead in a hair shirt). At least with the unhinged left you know what you are getting.

hat-tip Stephen Harper