I love it when a plan comes together. Well, not a plan actually because I could never in my wildest dreams have planned such a thing and actually have it work. But this month the truth finally came out.
On January 14, 2014 the Chief of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Christina Figueres, uttered the immortal words that “democracy is a poor political system” and “Communist China is the best model for fighting global warming.”
Ms. Figueres went on to say that the deep partisan divide in the US Congress is “very detrimental” to passing legislation to fight “global warming.” Yes, Christina, that’s the idea. Our country’s Constitution was written so that no single branch of government can snowball (pun intended) the others. Our legislative process is purposely cumbersome in order to prevent the precipitous passage of laws that are detrimental to the country. (Obamacare is one that slipped through the cracks, but I digress.)
In her job as Chief of the UNFCCC, Ms. Figueres is responsible for guiding more than 190 member-states in a UN-led initiative to draft an international treaty to fight “global warming.” The goal is to sign in 2015 a treaty that will take effect in 2020, replacing the Kyoto Protocol, which was adopted in 1997. Kyoto limits greenhouse pollutants in industrialized nations only (read the West) and leaves poorer countries (read China, India) to make voluntary commitments. Realizing how detrimental to its sovereignty and economy this treaty was, Canada pulled out in 2011 and Russia and Japan rejected new targets after 2012. The US never ratified it. In the end, the Kyoto Protocol has applied to less than 15 percent of global emissions. After all that…
While recognizing that China is the world’s top emitter of carbon dioxide and suffers from tremendous levels of pollution, Figueres praised the Chinese Communist Party for its ability to push key policies and reforms on its own. She added that the Chinese national legislature largely enforces (read “rubber stamps”) decisions made by the Communist Party’s Central Committee. And this, in Figueres’ mind, is why the Communist system is the best way to fight “global warming.”
“Developing” countries are notoriously the worst offenders as far as pollution goes, yet all the enviro-do-gooders want to do is punish Western countries like the US and the European Union, whose technological superiority enables them to actually lessen their greenhouse gas emissions and pollution – not just talk about it. Furthermore, the Communist system in China actually encourages air and water pollution in the name of economic development. Is it any surprise, then, that China refuses to join any UN treaties on climate change?
Increasing pressure from its long-suffering citizenry has forced the Chinese government to recognize it has a big problem. Last year the Chinese government offered financial incentives to curb pollution in the country’s six worst regions to the tune of over $800 billion USD. I suppose this could be construed as constructive.
However, I wonder if Christina knows what else the Communist government has done to battle pollution: It has empowered its courts to mete out the death penalty in serious pollution cases. You read that right – the death penalty. If ever there was a punishment that did not fit the crime I challenge anyone to produce it.
The unbelievable irony of this whole drama would be hilarious if it weren’t so serious and real lives were at stake – not only the potential death row inmates, but also those dying from black lung and other pollution-related illnesses.
As is well known, the “climate change” crowd is largely made up of followers of the “progressive” persuasion. And one of the key components of this philosophy is a strict respect for human rights, as well it should be for anyone of any political persuasion.
So let me get this straight. The Chinese Communists are now executing people for polluting and Christina Figueres says the Chinese Communists have “got it right?” Is there any more serious violation of human rights than to execute someone for anything less than pre-meditated murder?
It’s strange… I’m sure Human Rights Watch would have something to say about the UNFCCC’s tacit support of the state-sanctioned murder of environmental transgressors.
In the end, I suppose China’s extreme methods of dealing with polluters are just another “inconvenient truth” that Christina, the UN, Greenpeace, and the rest of them are all too willing to ignore.
By: Scott H. Gray