News Round-Up

A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the 'climate emergency', public health 'crises' and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.

8 min read
Subscribe to Listen

If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.

Comments

This week across the site:

Email me alerts for this discussion
Notify of

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.

31 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Dinger64
Dinger64
2 months ago

“Nigel Farage’s plan for navy to return small boat migrants ‘illegal’, says France”

Tough, do it anyway!

Heretic
Heretic
1 month ago
Reply to  Dinger64

“Illegal”? That’s rich coming from France, which has sometimes used FRENCH WARSHIPS to escort the Dinghy Zombie Invaders.

pjar
pjar
1 month ago
Reply to  Dinger64

If we were to simply not turn up to take over at the half-way point, the French might find themselves in a bit of a pickle under the terms of the SOLAS convention, which must prohibit abandoning people to their fate in the middle of the channel, surely?

Heretic
Heretic
1 month ago
Reply to  pjar

Excellent point!

JeremyP99
JeremyP99
2 months ago

“scorching heatwaves”
As opposed to??

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

Rod Liddle dead? Is it just me or does there seem to be a hell of a lot of people dying relatively young after a ‘short illness’ atm?

Valerie_London
Valerie_London
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

There has been for some 5 years or so.

ELH
ELH
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

I suspect he was well “J a b b e d”.

ELH
ELH
2 months ago
Reply to  ELH

(93) What Is Turbo Cancer? – Lies are Unbekoming This is a very good (albeit very long) read. If short of time go to end and read 2 summaries, how to explain it in an elevator and how to explain to a 6 yr old. Food for thought.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

Wrong place… Perhaps one useful update to the mass UI change would have been to allow comments to be deleted. That actually IS needed.

For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Although you can edit it to say “Deleted”

Monro
Monro
2 months ago

https://cepa.org/article/the-end-of-pretense-war-comes-home-to-russians/

Europe realizes that Russia is the greatest existential threat to its survival, the US cannot be trusted to offer its support, and Ukraine’s drones and defense tech are the key to being able to stop Russia.

It is no longer relevant for Ukraine whether it joins NATO. NATO is not key to Ukraine’s defense, but Ukraine is now key to Europe’s defense. Ukraine has the leverage here. Hence, European countries are now queuing up to sign defense tech deals with Ukraine, to leverage up and lock in Ukrainian expertise for their own future defense. And they know that Russia is coming for them, unless Ukraine is given the tools – cash and scale – to defeat Russia.

For a fist full of roubles
For a fist full of roubles
2 months ago
Reply to  Monro

“Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public policy institution headquartered in Washington, DC.” 
It is bound to be non-partisan!

stewart
stewart
2 months ago

Lyons argues that what the climate debate urgently needs is not window-gazing alarmism but a well-informed, nuanced discussion about what is actually to be done.

To be done about what exactly?

If we are talking about temperature rises of 1 degree over decades (big if, but let’s go with it) then why does anything need to be done? This is a temperature change that most people would not notice unless they looked at a thermometer.

And if we are talking about adjusting to changing weather, well we do what we have always done. Everyone adapts as they see fit.

We don’t need a nuanced discussion or any discussion at all. We need to very opposite – to stop talking about something that is only a thing because everyone keeps talking about it.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago
Reply to  stewart

A multi trillion dollar industry will never allow us to stop talking about it.

Communism has failed a number of times, but few people seem willing to accept that unrestricted capitalism leads you to exactly the same place – omnipotent power in the hands of the few. The few being the most psychopathic and Machiavellian in society.

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

I don’t think you can call the capitalism we have now “unrestricted” – specifically with respect to “climate change” industry has been encouraged or forced to do useless things. I don’t think even the most ardent advocates of capitalism think it should operate outside the law, nor do they claim that it leads to some perfect society. Evil people will always exist and will always misbehave.

What restrictions would you propose?

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

There is no restriction on the wealth (replace with power) that an individual can accumulate. It is, therefore, by definition, unrestricted.

The state use the green industry and the green industry use the state – it’s not one controlling the other, it’s a symbiotic relationship that advances an ideology. It’s a paradox – Marxism is advanced through capitalism.

And it’s not just the green blob of course; our very speech, thought, and behaviour is controlled by a silicon valley elite. MSM propagandises the masses through radio, TV, film, and news – all other by multi billionaires. We are coerced into medical interventions we don’t need because of a psychopathic pharmaceutical industry with trillions. I could go on, but there’s not much point. The state may appear to have influence, but it’s influence that’s welcomed by the omnipotent capitalists.

You ask what restrictions I would impose. That’s an essay in its own right, but it’s not difficult to imagine a number of measures that encourage creativity, invention, and growth whilst also reducing poverty and improving society as a whole. The trouble is that everyone gets very worked up if you dare criticise unrestricted capitalism in any way – it’s as… Read more »

stewart
stewart
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

There is no restriction on the wealth (replace with power) that an individual can accumulate

Nonsense.

In a free market environment, the limit is a person’s usefulness to others.

In a collectivist environment where things are imposed by force (e.g. the state and its government) the limit is the collective’s ability to impose itself by force.

I think you mistakenly call the collusion of private enterprise with state power capitalism, a mistake that almost everyone makes and which socialists are only to happy to encourage as it undermines people’s faith in free markets – the principal driver of prosperity.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago
Reply to  stewart

Oh dear. I’ve triggered you. And you’ve completely misunderstood and misrepresented my position. But this is what happens if you criticise religion.

stewart
stewart
1 month ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

No chance you’ll address the point then?

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Potentially unrestricted in one sense, in practice not, and not at all unrestricted in many others.

You list a number of evils which I sort of agree with up to a point but would argue that a lot of them are made possible or worse by the collusion of the state.

Appreciate you don’t necessarily have time to write an essay, but can you summarise your top half dozen proposals for “improving society as a whole”? I am not worked up by the way, just have grown very wary of people wanting to “improve things”.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

I didn’t say you were worked up, I said people do get worked up. Stewart does, unfortunately, seem a little worked up for example.

I’m not going to pen six proposals for you, but it really should be difficult to imagine how wealth could be capped with wealth above the cap being redirected. So you can still become a millionaire (multi needed these days I guess), but individual power is restricted through restriction of wealth.

And I agree, change for changes sake is a problem. But look around you. Don’t you think something malevolent has been manifested over time? And that is a reason for change?

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

I was just clarifying I was not worked up. I am worked up about “socialism” as it seems to be used as an excuse to make my life worse.

I am afraid I do find it difficult to imagine that government interference in markets “to improve society” won’t end badly.

Malevolence is part of life, so I don’t think it’s realistic for it to disappear.

Anyway, all of this is academic as most people have a completely different view than I do of how things ought to be organised, so I have to resign myself to that.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

But I never suggested government interference in markets either. I’m implying a free market that distributes the wealth it generates in way that restricts individual power. And, yes, I can see the argument for why that wouldn’t make it a free market, but I believe the two could work together with the right model.

No, neither of our ramblings will change a thing. I just don’t buy the idea that it has to be this way or that way – never have, never will.

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Well people do voluntarily give away money (not often power though) but they often don’t – someone or something has to force them if you want it done consistently. I suppose you could have generally agreed market rules and they could be “enforced” though sanctions from the rest of the market for rule breakers.

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago

They only give away money if the money they give away does not reduce their power. So the solution, it seems to me at least, is to have a safeguard that restricts power by restricting wealth. There will always be malevolent people about and the people that are in these lofty positions are, generally, megalomanic psychopaths. What I believe is we have to consider a social and economic model that puts brakes on the worst human traits and highlights those troublesome characteristics when they manifest. The difference between Lenin and, say, Gates is academic – they both controlled/control millions of people to further their own beliefs.

Anyway, we’re going round in circles. Back to slaving away for the man…

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
1 month ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Well the social model is that we imprison people for crimes, or we used to.

stewart
stewart
2 months ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

unrestricted capitalism leads you to exactly the same place – omnipotent power in the hands of the few

Based on what evidence?

Free Lemming
Free Lemming
2 months ago
Reply to  stewart

The evidence of your own eyes?

stewart
stewart
1 month ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Not mine. I don’t see omnipotence anywhere.
And I certainly don’t see capitalism making anyone omnipotent.
Just give me one example.

JeremyP99
JeremyP99
2 months ago
Reply to  stewart

1.5 degrees C since the end of The Little Ice Age
Or the start of the Industrial Revolution as the climate maniacs always say.

Thank you for reading. Please help us keep the Daily Sceptic going by becoming a donor.