Blithering stupidity from Pat Kane

Yet when you gather together the tribes of wellbeing, you hardly discover a lack of enterprise or innovation. The question is the nature of the \”new\” that\’s being sought. The other spectre that haunts liberal economics – other than the lingering unhappiness that its happy-clappy consumerism generates – is the broaching of planetary boundaries for survival. This was forcibly restated in last week\’s report from the International Energy Agency, which referred to the extreme climatic urgency of decarbonising our industries and economies.

Yes, let\’s fund primary science to keep open the possibility of radical innovation around energy and efficiency. Let\’s retain a Victorian-style ambition about constructing grand new infrastructures to answer our needs for mobility, housing, communication.

But what also needs to happen is precisely the kind of innovation around lifestyles, cultures and values pursued by those at the eco-minded end of the wellbeing agenda – seeing a low-carbon society as an opportunity for social excitement and behavioural novelty. For who else will build the mindsets, and communally forge the habits, that prepare us to cope with radical change – both the changes we invite, and the changes we\’ll have to endure?

Ignorant twat.

It is precisely liberal economics, liberal politics, liberal society, that allows the experimentation with other methods and modes of living.

You see, that\’s what liberal means. You do your thing, I\’ll do mine, and as long as we\’re all adults and don\’t frighten the horses then we can get on and do our own things.

\”Liberal economics\” isn\’t opposed to \”innovation around lifestyles\”. Liberal economics is innovation around lifestyles.

Get on with it, do your thing, and if it looks more fun that what we\’ve got then we\’ll all follow.

Jesus, it\’s as if everyone thinks that markets are only about goods: failing to see that there are markets in everything, methods of organisation, markets in lifestyles, markets in ideas, morals, just markets in every damn thing.

9 comments on “Blithering stupidity from Pat Kane

  1. And that is quite significant cherry-picking from the IEA report too. Which mostly called for more oil to be discovered and pumped and for fuel subsidies to be cut. Although if all you rely on is the BBC summary, you’d think they’re a bunch of greens.

  2. Damn, Tim, get yourself a better host for your website! It seem to be down somewhere between 0.1% and 1% of the time.

  3. “Get on with it, do your thing, and if it looks more fun that what we’ve got then we’ll all follow.”

    Tim, you miss the point: his lifestyle is guaranteed to be LESS fun and he knows it. That’s why he knows that he is running against liberal economics.

  4. But liberal does not mean liberal any more.

    It means bunch of smug, self-satisfying, mostly ignorant gits who want to meddle with everything to get it done their superior way to save the Planet and Mankind from himself.

    To us to lead a non-material, agrarian, self-sustaining life scratching in the dust being content with not very much, and with the mindset to cope with hunger, disease, relentless toil and boredom that the brave new liberal world of social justice will bring.

  5. “seeing a low-carbon society as an opportunity for social excitement and behavioural novelty”

    All I see is social excrement and behavioural nonentities!

    If the Fabian State had spent less time conducting a progam of Enclosures upon our personal and consensual lives, then such changes might be more obvious, frequent and bold.

  6. Wasn’t most Victorian infrastructure built by the private sector then later nationalised and destroyed?

  7. Useful Rule of Thumb: There is an inverse relationship between the level of blithering stupidity and the number of concrete nouns used.

    Number used in the quoted extract: 0.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.