Thomas Sowell reminds us that reality is often comprised of systems in action, where there are no obvious heroes and villains, nor easy entry points for political control. His reasoning stands in sharp contrast with the sentimentality and demagoging of our politicians on issues such as gas prices:
Some people think that the reason the public misunderstands so many issues is that these issues are too “complex” for most voters. But is that really so?
With all the commotion in the media and in politics about the high price of gasoline, is there really some terribly complex explanation?
Is there anything complex about the fact that with two countries– India and China– having rapid economic growth, and with combined populations 8 times that of the United States, they are creating an increased demand for the world’s oil supply?
The problem is not that supply and demand is such a complex explanation. The problem is that supply and demand is not an emotionally satisfying explanation. For that, you need melodrama, heroes and villains.It is clear that many people prefer to blame President Bush. Others prefer to blame the oil companies, who have long been the favorite villains of the left.
Politicians understand that. Numerous times they have summoned the heads of oil companies before Congressional committees to be denounced on nationwide television for “greed,” with the politicians calling for a federal investigation to “get to the bottom of this!”
Now that is emotionally satisfying, which is the whole point. By the time yet another federal investigation is completed– and turns up nothing to substantiate the villainy that is supposed to be the reason for high gasoline prices– most people’s attention will have turned to something else.
My question is where are all the environmentalists? Don’t they realize rising gas prices will lead to smaller, more efficient cars, less gas usage, home-buying decisions based on shorter commutes, and overall positive impacts on our local environment and “carbon footprint” here in the US. Sure, we’ll have fewer trucks and SUVs, carpool more, and the like. But isn’t that what they always say they want? Some do, of course. But environmentalist positions by Democrats are more of a pose. Class warfare apparently trumps environmental concerns in the Democratic Party.
Subscribe To This Feed
The Democrats are completely consistent. They want a lower “carbon footprint”, but they want the bill to be 100% covered by the wealthy and by the greedy oil companies and auto manufacturers (so long as they don’t lay off any of their assembly line workers).
The Democrats are consistent. Gore’s film was lambasted as inaccurate by the right. So…
The Democrats don’t want to lose swing voters who might think that “global warming” isn’t happening that quickly, or at all. But for moral reasons are fed up with the war and/or think the economy is going downhill. They’re hoping to run on “Bush wrecked the economy” as well as the “change” slogan.
They have to look for every vote because McCain is popular with “swing” voters.