I can even understand the bluest of blue-collar workers who have not had a great deal of schooling to understand the science of climate change voting for a self-acknowledged pussy-grabber and making him president. But, even the educated folks voting for this horrible human being all because the interests of business trump everything else?
This presidency is all about destroying various institutions that have been carefully built over the past eighty years--since the days of FDR. From NATO to voting rights, destroy them all! It is that maniacal approach that this administration and its GOP accomplices in Congress have taken up with the institutions that are about protecting and preserving the natural environment.
The EPA's administrator flatly stated that CO2 emissions due to human activity are not contributors to climate change. What surprised me was the fact that people were shocked and upset that he said that--as if he has no track record of having ever claimed that. The president made it clear throughout his campaign that he was going to do everything that he is doing now--well, he hasn't tweeted about grabbing any new pussies yet. Consistent with that campaign, he has also appointed a maniac who is determined to destroy the institution that a Republican president, Nixon, signed into law.
As I have often noted here, it is a losing battle if people believed that the climate change facts speak for themselves. It is not about logic and evidence, and merely lining up scientists after scientists won't do a damn thing. It is all about PR and politics. Now with this administration, it is all about a blitzkrieg against established institutions and their authority:
But in a sense, climate denial is just the tip of the (melting) iceberg. The right’s refusal to accept the authority of climate science is of a piece with its rejection of mainstream media, academia, and government, the shared institutions and norms that bind us together and contain our political disputes. ... Explaining the basic facts of climate science (again) is utterly futile if the intended audience rejects the authority of climate scientists and scientific institutions.But, for what end? Why do they want to destroy the authority of these, and other, institutions? Are we going to be better off with an acceleration in climate weirding? We can ask similar questions about other institutions too. Will we be better off with a more insecure Europe that worries about Putin's Russia?
We’re eventually going to have to grapple with this crisis of authority. Until then, more facts and periodic outbursts of outrage are futile.
Surely even the white supremacists want a less polluted world for their children and grandkids, right? But then perhaps I have no idea how the unhinged think?