A picture used by the Delaware Povertykeeper speaks volumes about the nature of fractivism. It is, to echo P.J. O’Rourke, a philosophy of sniveling brats.
One of our readers sent me a link the other day that spoke to the problem with fractivism. It was an appeal by the Delaware Povertykeeper a/k/a Riverkeeper for support for an amendment to the New York state Constitution similar to Pennsylvania’s environmental rights amendment, which, of course, has empowered special interest shills and environmental extremists such as Maya van Rossum with the ability to harass those seeking to do things like bring energy to people and slow down or kill whatever it is they’re doing.
I opened the link and staring me in the face was a picture of a happy Maya in full propagandist mood, speaking about such an amendment, which, of course, she ardently desires. What made me sit up straight and take notice, though, were the sad, miserable faces of those behind her, her legislative supporters. The photo said more about the nature of fractivism than anything I could possibly write.
Here’s what I saw:
Maya, of course, is in her element, thriving on the division she’s creating, advancing a 1970’s idea she now claims as her own, lecturing others, virtue signaling and selling her book. She’s also paying her own salary by shilling for the Park Foundation, which is paying her $25,000 for this particular campaign to push New York further over the cliff economically and politically.
But, look at those five sad sacks behind her. Are they wondering what they were thinking signing up for this or is there something else at work? It’s clearly the latter. Fractivism, like so much of wrong-headed doomsday environmentalism, means “never having to say you’re sorry” your 1970 prediction that we’d run out of oil by 2000 turned out to be spectacularly wrong. No, these people are morose, perpetually unhappy folks who derive their power from being scare-mongerers and supposing they’re the only folks who can possibly save the world from the rest of us.
Why does this dreadful unhappy attitude prevail in fractivism? After all, New York uses more natural gas than ever and fracking has made it both plentiful and cheap, saving New York householders untold thousands of dollars on utility bills. It has saved thousands of lives, too, by enabling the cleanup of New York City’s air as new boilers using clean natural gas have replaced environmentally inefficient equipment burning heavy oil.
It has also made the US increasingly energy independent, allowed us to make electricity with as much as 99% fewer emissions of things such as sulphur dioxide. It has increased our energy security, making us less dependent on foreign despots for our oil. It has dramatically lowered CO2 emissions to such a degree that no country has done better. And, it’s all happened with next to nothing in subsidies from taxpayers or other ratepayers.
There’s every reason to celebrate, but fractivists are determined to remain miserable. They are committed to opposing any oil and gas development whatsoever. They demand uneconomic, unreliable and unsustainable “clean energy” that’s anything but clean. They refuse to recognize such clean energy is opposed wherever it’s tried on any kind of scale and by the same people who oppose gas. They are determined to impose an ideology. They’re unwilling to accept the fact renewables cannot exist without backup power from natural gas or something comparably dispatchable for those times when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
And, this is before considering the horrible market distortions produced by picking energy winners and losers, the policies that have made the German Energiewende such a failure, with increasing CO2 emissions and constantly rising electricity prices. Yet, fractivists love that misery as well, constantly citing it as their desired future. Why? Because it satisfies the environmental religious compulsion to lead the way toward a utopia where they continue serve as Plato’s Guardians, but with honor for their virtues and power to impose ever more of their will. They’re miserable because we never get there fast enough for them.
Their impatience, in fact knows no bounds. They’re angry at Andrew Cuomo, for crying out loud, because he bizarrely wants to stop any more gas fueled power plants. This is even though his state cannot possibly hope to do more solar and wind without them, unless, of course, it goes nuclear. That seems unlikely given the costs and the fact he is taking credit for shutting down Indian Point.
Their anger stems not from his ludicrous proposal, which denies reality, but from the fact he might waffle or not do it soon enough. They threaten him at the same time they compliment him, in fact, proving fractivists tolerate nothing less than a 1000% commitment from others in imposing their will. They invariably eat their own. Cuomo has been feeding others to this crocodile and we know how that ends.
Fractivists are bitter, miserable, self-destructive, sniveling people who couldn’t care how much Cuomo (or any other pol) appeases them in the end if he’s not there for them the moment they make a new demand. It’s by constantly making such new demands that they perpetually sustain their power and prestige. They can only thrive on supposed misery to be alleviated by their own supposed superior talents. Giving those politicians pictured above the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they understand this and that’s why they’re so glum. Something tells me, though, they’re true believers, too, and that’s the better explanation for their sad sack faces.