Sin and sacrifice

It really is all about penance.

Elizabeth Svoboda writes in Salon about the loopy proposals for geoengineering some (including some who should know better) are proposing to counter "global warming" - a dangerous and unnecessary cure for a non-existent illness. A strong clue about the true nature of this hysteria and environmentalism in general comes toward the end:

.... grand-scale sun-blocking schemes feel dubious in part because they challenge our intuitive sense that large-scale wrongs can be atoned for only with equally large-scale sacrifices. Drastic emissions cutbacks require drastic lifestyle changes, like taking shorter showers and scrapping the Hummer. Such changes feel right because they're a little painful; putting the squeeze on ourselves is suitable penance for the collective sin of spewing tailpipe fumes into the atmosphere for the past 100-plus years.

It's been clear for some time that post-liberalism (or whatever you want to call the post-1960s degeneration of liberalism) is not secular politics at all; it's a pseudo-religion, a replacement for lost faith in traditional religions. The politicians are the demigods, both good and evil, who determine our fate, and the priesthood and preachers of damnation, penance, and salvation are the journalists. The scientists' role is, I guess, to act as Magi, reading entrails and cracks in bones for signs of the higher gods' anger. Allegedly, even as the Antarctic cools faster than ever recorded, these gods must be placated with sacrifice. This might require hoisting my car on to an altar, dousing it with oil, and lighting it on fire - I'll have to check the old manual to see if this is covered. Hey, without burning any more gasoline, it'll be better than carbon-neutral!

Now I get it.

(Hat tip to Instapundit.)