#COP21: We’ll Always Have Paris, Unfortunately - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
#COP21: We’ll Always Have Paris, Unfortunately
by

Paris is lovely in the autumn.

According to the attendees of the Conference of Parties, 21, however, by this time next year, Paris — along with every other major city — could be an abandoned ruin, smothered in smog, with lava floes running through the streets, burning out only where they meet the melted ice caps. Humans will have long since adapted to living at the poles, sunning themselves in the ozone hole, feasting off the last remains of polar bears, and bemoaning that moment when they failed to take notice of a five-day, five-star, 575-million-pounds-of-CO2 gathering of world leaders and “climate activists” that was meant to save us all. 

According to organizers, #COP21 is our last, best hope to save this planet from the incremental warming it’s undergone since the late 1880s (total approximately .85 degrees Celsius), likely the result of our planet’s ill luck: we orbit a blazing ball of gas that is as unforgivably hot as it is unpredictable. Climate is always changing, and while human beings haven’t been as kind to the planet as we could have been, for most of its history, Earth has been home to the kind of climate that would fry humans faster than a primordial bug zapper. But as the 150-plus major dignitaries who flew into Paris on their private jets on Monday would say, the global elite will never miss an opportunity to demonstrate that they know what’s best for poor people, especially if it affords them the opportunity to control nearly every aspect of how they live.

The early part of the conference, a “private” meeting between world leaders, began on Monday with the annual private fly-in. Presidents, prime ministers, and whatever passes for elected leadership were called upon to make sweeping speeches dedicating themselves and the people of their respective countries to the cause of preventing “climate change.” They’ll commit to leveling off the “global temperature increase” at 2 degrees Celsius, as though they’d have anything to do with it, and to spend their respective constituents’ money on a multi-billion-dollar “climate fund.” 

Some leaders, like President Barack Obama, were cautious about their approach at the conference, giving a speech only five times the proscribed length limit, and speaking primarily about how climate change is a greater threat to the world than a band of homicidal maniacs beholden to a bizarre interpretation of an ancient holy book and bent on bringing about the apocalypse by blowing everyone in a Western country sky high. I suppose to be fair, he also said that solving “climate change” is the key to solving global terrorism, because if there’s any concern outlined in ISIS propaganda materials, it’s a commitment to environmentalism — though, if pressed, you could probably count the systematic murder of millions as a way to reduce the carbon footprint. Barack Obama, of course, didn’t give it that much thought; according to our President, the primary motivating factor behind Islamic terrorism is a drought that may or may not have happened in Syria, that may or may not have been the result of people driving conversion vans in Columbus, Ohio in 1987. Good news, though, they’re certain to see the climate accords signed in Paris as an “act of defiance,” so you should be certain you have nothing to fear from suicide bombers, so long as they know what good we’ve done for the Earth.

Others, like Robert Mugabe, were more ambitious in their plans to curb greenhouse emissions. Yes, that Robert Mugabe — Zimbabwe’s famed dictator, and perhaps the world’s most corrupt official — is tasked with presenting Africa’s position and needs on climate change, though he, too, is most familiar with curbing carbon dioxide by killing the humans who expel it in large numbers. I suspect he won’t bring that up. Chinese leaders will also present their ambitious plan to rid the world of pollution competing industrialization, the only possible impact of their “environmental commitment,” as the Chinese take clean air so seriously, they’ve stopped allowing people to breathe in at all in their capital city. President Obama was quick to tout America’s partnership with Beijing in bringing its “environmental” strategies to fruition.

Of course, silly words, pointless meetings, massive motorcades, lavish dinners, and a general disregard for the well-being of the proletariat are de rigueur for any meeting associated with the United Nations. The problem with #COP21, as opposed to, say, anything else the United Nations agrees to coordinate, is that this clown college will ultimately have a financial and personal impact on Americans. Typically, the UN is allowed to meddle only in the affairs of countries that don’t know better than to let it write strongly worded letters on their behalf, but when it comes to “climate change” the UN needs money in order to create the kind of “paradigm shift” back to Medieval agriculture and plague-ridden civilization that it so desperately seeks. Obviously, that cash isn’t coming from the thousands of delegates, among them the world’s wealthiest and most famous, who will spend their week in Paris discussing carbon emissions over champagne and truffles, as they are far too important to part with the cash that sustains them. The money is, mostly, coming from Americans. 

According to Barack Obama’s commitment to the global climate fund, the U.S. alone will give $3 billion to the effort to curb global carbon dioxide emissions, which will only cost the average American family $7,000, though that doesn’t include the cash we’ve expended to get our Climate-Strategist-in-Chief to the gala, a mere $750,000. In return, Americans will get higher electricity rates, unemployment, and the joy of knowing that despotic third world dictators will use the money to gold plate their powder room toilets — sustainably mined gold plate, though, of course. And that’s barely the beginning of the plan. According to Obama, who noted yesterday that he finds taxation be the most “elegant” way to encourage environmentally focused innovation, his last signature effort as President will be to force Americans to abide by greater controls on the carbon they use, especially if they happen to use it in their line of work. I’d say avail yourself of a campfire now, in anticipation of the inevitable backwards slide in technology, except that he’s probably going to target those, too. If you burn the trees, after all, you’re not saving them.

This is, of course, a roundup of the high level thought associated with COP21. Each of these world leaders is actually responsible for addressing climate change as part of their domestic policy, and each of them is armed with a bevvy of consultants, aides, and researchers who can help to make their pie-in-the-sky notions of environmental activism into partially acceptable legislative solutions. Starting at the end of this week, Paris will welcome 20,000-40,000 more delegates, all of whom are dedicated amateurs in the government game. So if you thought these last few days have produced some astoundingly bad ideas, just wait until the scientists start talking. 

Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!