The Irish Government’s mooted plan to slaughter some 200,000 cattle has been getting a great deal of attention this week. It is said, implausibly, that doing so will help save the planet from global warming, although prominent commentators, such as Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk, have been quick to point out that, as policy measures go, it looks, well, quite mad.
Sudden urges to slaughter herds of cattle are, however, not without historical precedent. In 19th-century South Africa, a child prophetess named Nongqawuse persuaded her people, the Xhosa, that if they slaughtered all their livestock and burnt down their granaries everything would be miraculously replaced. Of course, when they tested her claims out, the reality was very different and, cattle being the basis of their economy, the policy resulted in the utter destruction of their society. Ireland beware!
The story of the cattle killings is told in The Grip of Culture, a new book that will soon be published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (full disclosure: I am the book’s editor). Its central theme is that, like the Xhosa, our society is now being directed by what is known as a ‘cultural entity’ (or ‘a culture’ for short); the term covers both religions and extreme political movements – secular religions, if you like. The culture we are facing is, of course, climate catastrophism.
The book explains that cultures are a function of our subconscious and evolved alongside our genes as a way to bind groups of human beings together. They are an entirely natural feature of the human condition; they affect all of us. At the centre of each is a narrative of doom and redemption. Remarkably, this is always false, and indeed it is often scarcely even plausible. However, most adherents have never even read the core texts around which their culture has formed: this is as true of Extinction Rebellion supporters’ suppositions about the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as it was of a medieval peasant’s trust in the truth of the Latin Bible, or a Red Guard’s faith in the Das Kapital. A statement of belief in the climate catastrophe narrative is therefore not a rational, considered opinion; it is simply a way of signalling to other people that you are a member of the climate ‘club’.
The behaviours that make cultures so effective are seen across history. Demonisation of opponents is one obvious example; accusations of heresy have done their work from time immemorial. Those within the culture are warned not to stray from orthodoxy, and those outside it are invited to join up and win the group benefits (or to face the consequences). The terminology may have changed – ‘denier’ is the current term of art – but the intent, to silence dissent and to prevent questioning of the narrative, is the same.
Similarly, cultures have always sought to get at children, to infect them with the mind virus while their parents’ backs are turned; a glance at the curriculum shows that climate catastrophism is now dominant in schools, although jostling for position with some of the other new cultures that are on the scene. Children, and particularly girls, also turn up in cultures in the role of prophets, their perceived innocence helping to protect them from criticism; Greta Thunberg is only the latest in a long line that stretches back far beyond Nongqawuse.
Perhaps the most important feature of cultures is that they operate subconsciously, and therefore entirely irrationally. Once we understand this, the apparent madness of the last 20 years starts to make a kind of sense. So yes, those who merely question the wisdom of Net Zero are demonised and cancelled; as we have seen, that’s what cultures do. And when we see politicians fawning over the scatterbrained utterances of a teenage truant, we can now understand why. Similarly, if rationality ruled, we would not be closing down nuclear power, or importing (high-emissions) fossil fuels rather than getting them from the North Sea. But rationality is in retreat, so that is what we are doing.
Because they bind societies so tightly together, cultures are extraordinarily powerful forces. They have been responsible for the rise of great civilisations and the construction of great monuments, from the waterworks of Ur and Babylon to the pyramids and beyond. But because they are irrational, they can just as often be a force for societal self-destruction, as the 19th-century Xhosa and the 20th-century Germans found out to their cost. It’s hard to say whether a culture will take a constructive or a destructive path, but it’s fair to say that a disastrous end is more likely when you have a millenarian culture – one that aims to tear down the fabric of society and start again. Unfortunately, that’s what we appear to be facing today. Gripped by the culture of climate catastrophism, society seems hell-bent on ripping up the energy system that is the foundation of our civilisation with only the vaguest idea of what might replace it. The Xhosa would recognise the tendency.
To that end, we have embarked on a process of decarbonisation, but – and extraordinarily – without knowing what we will do when the wind is not blowing. This can in no way be rational, but is perfectly comprehensible when you recognise that we are being driven by a culture. At the centre of the book is a remarkable series of measurements showing that national religiosity is an excellent predictor of otherwise incomprehensible public attitudes to climate change, including enthusiasm for renewables. Similarly, pursuing this course when the costs are known to be much higher than the benefits looks like insanity. But, once more, it’s the kind of thing that happens when a cultural entity is at work. The culture does what is good for the culture, not what is good for mankind.
There is no end of crazy climate policies: electric cars, travel restrictions, 15-minute cities, veganism and insect-based diets are just a few off the top of my head. Climate catastrophists’ calls for such measures are only statements of faith, a signal to others. They are not meant to be taken literally – that’s why so many Extinction Rebellion supporters are frequent flyers and enjoy their holidays in the sun just as much as the rest of us. But society responds to the calls for ever more windfarms as if they were, and we are left worrying whether the lights will stay on this winter.
A cultural analysis, of the kind set out in The Grip of Culture, can explain the suicidal course taken by Western societies. Its message, that the true threat to our civilisation comes, not from the weather or the climate, but from the culture of catastrophism that has weaponised those issues is profoundly disturbing. Those of us who are fond of living in a free and rational society need to understand what we are facing, and soon.
Andrew Montford is Director of Net Zero Watch.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I must admit, those girls look rather fetching in their red outfits.
I wonder if the chap was gender-confused, or if there was just an outfit going spare and he thought: ‘Why not?’
That’s not a man, it’s a woman with a moustache. Honestly, get with the times!
That’s right. We uphold his right to have babies. Even if he can’t. And to be called Loretta.
‘it’s’ right…….
How insulting, it’s an ‘it’ with a moustache these days…….
You need to brush up on your pronoun usage.
Very funny if politically wokish and 100% unacceptable. CARRY ON!!
Lets hope so, tho I fear with all the globalists pushing it, it’s HUGE funding trough and the thousands feeding from it, together with the Royals income from offshore wind farm rent, and tory landowners windfoarm rentseeking, it may be a forlorn hope.
If only there was a killer pandemic that would reduce the global population.
Next one on the the way!
Hey Smelly,
That is exactly what old Phil the Greek (Queens late husband) wished for.
We got it in his son I suppose.
The climate change BS simply acts as additional support and cover for the Reset nightmare.
It all melds together – Ukraine is the diversion. from the UN/WHO Gates power grab over our lives!
The Xhosa thing got progressively worse. After the first wave of voluntary animal slaughter failed to produce results they ordered the destruction of animals belonging to non believers and, when that didn’t work, the killing of the non believers themselves.
Another op-ed piece with no citations. I guess the plandemic really is over.
It’s full of bloody citations. I should know, I put them in.
Language Timothy…….
May I point out that citations are not usually put in headlines?
UAH Satellite data
https://notrickszone.com/2022/03/18/co2-a-blessing-just-1-ppm-increase-means-up-to-0-8-greater-crop-yields-new-study-shows/
A good thing right?
@Toby – You know what those red-clad white-faced “extinction of the fifth epoch” guys and gals actually mean by dressing like that – am I right? Your father, grandmother, and greatgrandfather would certainly have known. They would have caught the “root race” reference immediately. They wouldn’t have needed to check “Extinction Rebellion’s” connections with Stroud.
Breakdown won’t happen because of too much carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere. No sane person thinks that.
Meanwhile, here’s a simulation of what a nuclear war between the US and Russia might look like.
Nicola Sturgeon favours “not ruling out a no-fly zone”, while the British media refers not to her but to Vladimir Putin as if he’s the crazy person.
Dominic Cummings is totally with me on this one.
Clued-up military guys (a small minority, but they do exist) are giving it no more than 7 days between a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine and the war going nuclear.
Benchmarks:
Fun fact: Jens Stoltenberg of NATO is a raving Steinerite. That nutcase wants nuclear war.
“Breakdown won’t happen because of too much carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere. ”
If there were “too much” CO2 going into the atmosphere it would cause breakdown.
Mankind’s contribution is, however, inconsequential and Mother Nature tells us the ‘ideal’ threshold of atmospheric CO2 is around 1,000ppm (parts per million atmospheric content) as C3 plant life (95% of all plant life) flourishes around that.
No wonder so many people are still possessed of Project Fear.
I watched Channel 5 for three hours this morning (don’t ask).
8-9am ‘News’: mostly interviews with weepy people saying how they felt about awful Ukraine affecting them. The rest being various crime and weepy people weepily answering “how did it make you feel ?”
Followed by magazine programme with weepy lady who had 3 dogs stolen because Crime raised prices of dogs.
“How do you feel after only two were returned?”
“How do you feel about the people who have got your other dog?”
Then an hour programme ‘Caught On Camera’ (or somesuch). Videos of crimes in progress.
“How did you feel after watching your dad getting his face kicked in ?”
‘
One long feely Weeporama for us to join in.
Because feminism, I reckon. And youth.
Its said in aggregate that women prefer people and feelings and men prefer things and logic. Its probably why men have brought more STEM inventions into the world but women more people. Every people throughout the history of mammalian life come to think of it.
Also women are more likely the viewers at home on a weekday.
Uterus owners are also the majority users of harmful social media, which acts as a rapid-deployment lobby-group-for-hire, in the hybrid warfare of modern consent manufacture for the Angry Birds generation. And why social media prizes feelings and emotions over facts and logic.
Social media also skews younger, and if you’re not a socialist when you’re young you’re a bore.
Not that I reckon feminism is inherently bad. There should certainly be equality of opportunity between the TWO genders, within reason, and in the West there is, and has been, for a long time. I also consider creating and nuturing life a pretty worthwhile existence, and by no means lesser than a corporate career.
Stigmatising universal omnipresent roles seeds self-doubt, exacerbating known depressive and anxiety-inducing qualities of social media.
Of course there are exceptions to any rule/generalisation.
I think you will have managed to be offensive to most of the people on here in one fell swoop:
Anyone who was not a socialist when young, for you have sweepingly asserted that they are therefore all bores. You may reasonably gauge that is quite a large proportion of readers you have just insulted!
Anyone who feels it is inappropriate, or offensive, especially when unprovoked, to classify a gender by calling them owners of specific genitalia. In this case neither women nor those who love their wives, daughters, sisters, female friends and/or mothers will be keen, and especially this obtains with Mothering Sunday coming up, will like it.
Anyone who can’t stand sweeping generalisations.
I wonder if that is wise.
If there are two sick and perverted people who think it is acceptable to refer to women as ‘uterus owners’ and presumably men as ‘inseminator owners’ then so be it. Very rude and highly insensitive nutcases, and perhaps they are the kind of people proud to be very rude, and depersonalising. Their loss. Yuck!
There was a seminar to which attendance was compulsory for all TV and Radio journalists that started over 10 years ago – don’t know if this is true but the evidence is compelling and damning.
Easy to spot those who got the attendance certificate – picture the captain of a national rugby team, last game in the 6 Nations, Grand slam riding on the game which his team won after a monumentally tough, physical game with a miracle last minute drop goal from one his second row – immediate post game interviewer, “doorsteps” in a prearranged ambush one step off the pitch, doesn’t matter whether male or female ( bollox to all you pronoun warriors), first question ” How are you emotions” – aforementioned captain struggles and just avoids saying “F*** O**, I’m knackere,d how the bloody hell do you think I am feeling?” – insert suitably anodyne and meaningless rubbish garbage woke PC speak…
For some stupid reason, the seminar facilitator brainwashed the attendees that asking “open” questions, beginning with “who, what, were, how” to the fore, for a 90 second interview where the way to go. I have long thought these TV journalists should not take the ring out of their noses just for the TV viewers.
If ever a closed question needing a very short answer was needed…….
Does a ‘Great Disappointment’ Await The Climate Zealots?
not if state and media have their way.
Carrie will not allow it anyway!
“Hallam was previously an organic farmer on a 10-acre (4-hectare) farm near Llandeilo in South Wales; he attributes the destruction of his business to a series of extreme weather events.
Well maybe if he looked after the land properly he’d still be in business.”
Simple bad management. The man is a self obsessed walking disaster.
The creepy berobed women in the picture always remind me of the frenzied medieval flagellants who would parade through towns in Europe between the 11th and 16th centuries, whipping each other to atone for their sins and calling on the populace to repent. They gained many new members in the mid-14th century while the Black Death was ravaging Europe.
Now presumably these congenitally stupid people are unconsciously (?) mimicking this movement in the hope of engendering fear of the apocalypse. To everyone else
they look look like suitable cases for treatment. No doubt they gained new members during the hyped Covid “plague”.
This is a good book: “The Pursuit of the Millennium: Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages” by Norman Cohn.
Blimey, you’re old.
Where’s the love for Harold Camping?
It is all part of a much bigger take-down of the whole West.
Watch out for te power grab over our entire lives by the Gates -WHO backed by the UN and the psychotic nightmare they are planning for us all on every front.!
Yes, it seems impossible to believe – but so are the last two years .
I’m not sure there can be a New World Order when Russia and China simply won’t cooperate unless on their own terms.
It’s not the first time this has been planned. Shortly after WW1 certain British politicians and wealthy individuals were determined to have the world ruled by Britain. Then a certain Austrian gentleman pitched up and wanted it done to his agenda.
Whilst the west is getting its knickers in a twist over Ukraine, there are a lot of countries around the world which refuse to condemn Russia.
Russia will just sell oil to China once the west stops buying. In 20 years we will find out who really bothered with global warming.
We will have electric milk carts to protect us from the East.
“Can’t understand why Bulb’s electric prices have increased given that it is supposed to be 100% renewable and not reliant on fossil fuel.”
The same excuse used to resist fracking will be trotted out. All that ‘cheap’ wind power must respond to global market forces.
A few years ago, just before Covid hit, I found myself walking through the Botanic Gardens in Sydney, and then along Circular Quay on the way to have breakfast.
It was another incredibly beautiful morning. Blue skies, blue sea, tourists lapping it up, full of the joys of summer.
But as I turned into Circular Quay, I noticed a red-clad XR group was forming, just like in the photo above.
As I walked past, all blissed out on the joys of summer (especially as it was close to freezing back home), a couple of them looked at me as if they hated me more than words could say, for being a white male.
They were all dressed in red, but what they needed for completeness was a pair of red horns.
I was reminded of the Marlon Brando scene in Apocalypse Now where he says that suddenly it looked like Heaven just fell on the earth in the form of gardenias.
But at Circular Quay that morning it was followed by Hell just falling on the earth in the form of XR.
The trick is to know when and where they are going to meet, and as they stomp off in their stupid costumes, to go and let all their car tyres down. Leave notes on their windscreens saying ‘Hypocrite’.
Personally, I would rather they were hosed down with slurry.
Nearly two thousand years ago, a strange group was told “Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” That’s pretty clear! The son of man will be returning within the life time of some of those living. 2000 years later, they are still waiting.
So, it is quite possible that in 2000 years time, the followers of gretism will still be awaiting the climate apocalypse … or indeed, instead of warming, they will be watching the ice advancing and saying “we told you so”.
And the IPCC reports from the late 20th and early 21st centuries became their ‘Bible’.
Not sure it is pretty clear re Matthew 16.28. If you look at the interlinear version on Biblehub, there is a degree of ambiguity:
Matthew 16:28 Greek Text Analysis (biblehub.com)
According to how you understand the coming of the Kingdom (e.g. semi-realised or realised eschatology) and what you understand by Final Judgement (immediately post individual death, or as a more staged community affair, or both), and other matters, like Time, and the perception therof, there are an array of interpretations possible, and various are currently held by different theologians, from the Greek text.
Well, if “2000 years later, they are still waiting” then it must still be within their lifetime.
Anyway, thanks for the crummy ‘eisegesis’. The Son of man says that they will see him ‘coming in his kingdom’ and into that statement you read a returning, i.e. Second Coming. Obviously you don’t understand Greek, otherwise you would know that the verb translated ‘come’ doesn’t imply a direction of travel towards the viewer, as it would in English. It can just as well mean ‘go’ or simply ‘appear’.
If you interpret a prophecy in a way that is false, don’t be suprised that you can’t understand how it was fulfilled in the first century.
So in 1856, the Xhosa having been at war with well-equipped British colonialists for several years suddenly decides to kill all its cattle and destroy all supplies of food and farming implements.
After the population is decimated, the British colonialists take over and subjugate the survivors.
Hmmm, I don’t think this takes much of a leap in imagination….
“She’s not the Missiah. She’s a very naughty girl, for skipping school and attending environmental protests! Now, piss off!”
Her handler, Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace, was appointed a special representative for international climate policy Federal Foreign Office in Germany in 2022.
She reports to, or takes her orders from, Annalena Baerbock, Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs, whom you might be unsurprised to learn, is a graduate of Schwab’s school of young global leaders.
Just a bunch of out of work street performance actors.
Just a wunch of bankers.
Another excellent piece Chris. Big fan of your work.
So many parallels, human nature never changes.
Good piece – let’s hope he’s right.
Why do people continue to listen to these ridiculous fools? They pull the same kind of stunts over and over again, and still people fall for it. Every time they preach death, doom and destruction. But funnily enough the resolution always involves self-sacrifice – literally; the loss of liberty and freedom; the loss of personal wealth and the destruction of finances. Isn’t it time humanity grew up and put these people in a padded cell and where they belong?
The price of freedom of expression must be borne by us all.
Unless one is a lefty of course, in which case conservatives are cancelled.
‘Are we reaching peak climate hysteria after 40 years of relentless green campaigning?’
I think we reached it in ’07.
On 03-Feb-07, the BBC headlined its evening news with the soul-cry that the end of the world was nigh. At that time, you couldn’t have found a single senior scientist, or spokesperson for a scientific body or government organisation, or university, to say differently. The climate-catastrophe ‘consensus’ was 100% solid: Mr Attenborough was right there (same chap, same HRH at his side, no seer infant though – they didn’t use children with a mental-health history so much then) to tell us if we didn’t take ‘akkshun naaow’, it would all be over within 7 years. End of the world. Finis! Ex-planet.
As any kind of climate sceptic, you would have been attacked from every side. Monbiot (same chap) would have seethed ‘Denier’ at you, likening you to a denier of the Nazi death camps. If you worked for a government, or educational, or scientific body, you would have been marginalised, traduced, and quite possibly forced out of your job. If you’d tried to say that science is not done by deference or by whipped-up ballyhoo, but by data, you would have been challenged to say who you think you are, compared to presidents of the Royal Society (Nurse, May) and big-wigs at NASA (Hansen).
If you’d tried, like IPCC scientist Kevin Trenberth, to point out that the temperature data were showing no increase since 1998, for 9 years past, it would have done you no good. The consensus cacophony would have just got worse.
Yet, you would have been right.
And they, the whole alarmist top set of them – Nurse, May, Hansen, King, HRH, Harrabin, Attenborough – would have been wrong. Totally wrong. Disgracefully, anti-scientifically wrong. And you would have been right. And for one simple reason. You were the only proper scientist out of the lot of them. Because you were the only one paying attention to the data.
That was 2007. Sound familiar?
How true. I hope to see an end to all this nonsense before I shuffle off this mortal coil for the sake of my daughter, grandchild and their descendants. I’ve also just highlighted another problem – a single offspring. Get breeding, people. Sock it to the Malthusians.
A bit late, but I’ve declaimed a panagyric to your article here
https://cliscep.com/2022/03/28/open-gretas-box-ipcc-ar27-wgxviii/