<\/p>\n
This piece has absolutely nothing to do with Pagan spirituality. It does have a lot to do with why I am who I am.<\/p>\n
Two low-profile brothers have recently been in the news as <\/p>\n When I was in high school in Wichita, Kansas, I had become a Charles Koch saw me there, led me over to the small At the time I knew him, Charles Koch was a libertarian, and I met his brother David, but never got to know him. <\/span>He was much less interested in ideas As the years passed my visits with him slowed, and Charles apparently gradually shifted to supporting those The Kochs still help fund a number of organizations that As state socialism failed, and ceased to be a threat, and Who was the instigator and who was the target in this And so the classical liberal paradigm became a rigidly Markets, the Environment, and Global Warming<\/b><\/p>\n The Koch’s role in funding a variety of organizations that There is absolutely nothing in free market thought that If, as most scientists who study the issue believe, the problem of global warming is A carbon tax would also reduce our dependence on foreign The Koch Industries have We believe the political response to climate issues should be Who could possibly oppose this
\nthe largest funders of attacks<\/a> on the scientific evidence cited for global
\nwarming. They are also and have always been major figures in the oil industry. <\/span>As it turns out I knew one of them
\nyears ago, and probably would not have ended up being a scholar had I not. He
\nset me on that path.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
\nyoung conservative attracted to right-wing conspiracy theories. <\/span>One afternoon I was in the American
\nOpinion Bookstore, a John Birch Society<\/a> operation filled with books on the
\nCommunist conspiracy. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nclassical liberal section he had persuaded them to have, and bought me my first
\nserious books on social theory – volumes by Ludwig von Mises<\/a> and other leading
\nand historical classical liberal scholars. <\/span>This was heady stuff for a young man just discovering his
\nlove of history and ideas. <\/span>It also
\nbegan weaning me away from my high school level understanding of Communist conspiracies
\nand other foolishness. <\/span>I will
\nalways be grateful to him for doing so, and he was one of three to whom I
\ndedicated my first book<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\ndismissive of the John Birch Society conspiracy theories in which his dad
\nindulged. <\/span>(Ironically, the initial
\nKoch fortune came from doing business with the early Soviet Union, and perhaps
\nFred Koch, sr. felt some guilt over it.)
\n<\/span>Charles was also interested in ideas, and enjoyed discussing them. <\/span>I fondly remember sitting with some friends
\nand him in his folks’ house talking about Abraham Maslow’s<\/a> work. Especially his <\/span>Toward a Psychology of Being<\/a><\/i>. <\/span>We all liked it. <\/span>If I remember correctly, he also
\nopposed the Vietnam War – but my memory may be off base here. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nand philosophy than was his brother.
\n<\/span>That I do remember.<\/p>\n
\neventually ceased. <\/span>Over time I
\nbecame less and less of a libertarian, and I guess Charles did as well. <\/span>But we apparently moved in different
\ndirections. <\/span>I became more open to
\ndemocratic government even while continuing to support the market. <\/span>Today I no longer consider myself a
\nlibertarian. <\/span><\/p>\n
\n‘conservatives’ who sought a more authoritarian and intrusive government so
\nlong as it did not tax his great wealth.
\n<\/span>In doing so he apparently downgraded his youthful love of freedom as
\nsomething more than freedom to make lots of money. I say “apparently” because I am not sure why – but he has certainly funded people who are very very far removed from being classical liberals.<\/p>\n
\namong other things continue to help people better understand the workings of
\nmarkets. <\/span>These organizations
\ntaught me a lot when I was younger and I am still very friendly with some
\npeople I met back then. <\/span>But back
\nthen the ideological opponent was state socialism in its various guises and
\nhubris over the ability of experts to plan the good life, and their push-back
\nwas important. T<\/span>his push back
\nwas primarily intellectual, effectively criticizing the arguments of its
\nadvocates. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nthe most arrogant plans for redesigning America lost their glitter, the target
\nfor many within these organizations shifted to any kind of regulation at
\nall. <\/span>‘Socialism’ kept being
\ndefined downwards. <\/span>Along the way
\nthe attacks became increasingly political and personal because, to my mind
\nanyway, the evidence on their side became increasingly weak. <\/span>But, as I have written so often,
\norganizations seek to survive and will do so by redefining their reason for
\nexistence.<\/p>\n
\ndynamic will depend on historical research. <\/span>Maybe the organizations convinced the Kochs and other
\nfunders and maybe they simply sought to please them. Maybe it was reciprocal. <\/span>Whatever the dynamic, a reasonably open intellectual agenda
\nincreasingly became a closed one.
\n<\/span>Research was to provide ammunition for what was already believed, not
\ninvestigate anything in an open minded way. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nideological one, defined as opposition to anything by government regardless of
\nthe evidence. <\/span>Other, perhaps, than
\nwaging war. (This is not the case for all classical liberal organizations, but
\nit is so for a great many.)<\/p>\n
\noften viciously attack the scientists involved in global warming studies is sad
\nevidence for me of this outcome. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nprejudges the truth or falsity of global warming issues. <\/span>The reality of human caused global
\nwarming is not intrinsically anti-capitalist or anti-market. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nsignificantly man-made, then CO2 is a pollution, but one where each person’s
\ncontribution is too small to be dealt with at an individual level. <\/span>So government action is needed. <\/span>But in this case a carbon tax could
\nreplace taxes on positive things, such as wages, in order to pay for Social
\nSecurity. <\/span>Labor would become
\ncheaper for the employer without any cost to the worker, jobs would therefore
\nincrease, and people would constantly seek out ways to minimize carbon
\ncreation. <\/span>Such a tax could be
\n‘revenue neutral.’ From a broad libertarian or free market perspective this is
\na win-win arrangement.<\/p>\n
\noil, which diminishes the rationale for a big military, troops overseas, and
\nincessant wars. <\/span>The power of Arab despotisms is weakened as they have
\nless money. <\/span>Again, from a
\nlibertarian perspective, this is win-win, because war is the single largest
\ncause for the growth of government. So from a genuinely free market perspective
\nreducing dependence on oil is probably more a gain than a loss.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nresponded<\/a> <\/span>to the Greenpeace study of their
\ninfluence in funding global warming denial, arguing<\/span><\/p>\n
\nbased on sound science. Both a free society and the scientific method require
\nan open and honest airing of all sides, not demonizing and silencing those with
\nwhom you disagree. We’ve strived to encourage an intellectually honest debate
\non the scientific basis for claims of harm from greenhouse gases. We have tried
\nto help bring out the facts of the potential effectiveness and costs of policies
\nproposed to deal with climate, as it’s crucial to understand whether proposed
\ninitiatives to reduce greenhouse gases will achieve desired environmental goals
\nand what effects they would likely have on the global economy.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
\nlogic? <\/span>Not me. But I think it is
\nPR boilerplate. <\/span>Too many of the
\nattacks on global warming science have focused on anything but the science. <\/span>Many in the organizations supported by
\nthe Kochs have attacked the personal motives of the scientists and emphasized
\norganizational abuses that are endemic in all human groups, but not indicative
\nof bad scientific data<\/a>. In one case, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, I have personal knowledge,
\nand am not simply reporting what I have read. <\/span>The Competitive Enterprise Institute is basically an attack
\norganization existing to discredit environmental concerns without regard for
\nthe truth<\/a> of their claims. <\/span><\/p>\n