Left, right and wrong

Flicked on taxpayer-funded, Trendy-Lefty Radio CBC Radio One a few weeks ago and happened upon ex-lexicographer Tom Howell asking people what they think "reasonable" and "conservative" mean. Basically, the discussion boiled down to a bunch of empty vessels spouting their opinion as to whether "conservatives" are "reasonable"...

Surprising for CBC, the program did shoehorn a couple of token opinions as to how "reasonable" "progressives" might be. Enter Elizabeth May:

Our one and only Lizzy-Dizzy May subscribes to green ideology and is a serial religious ideologue. We learn in the interview that 'Liz'beth has conservative inclinations, also. Long before she became a full-fledged, green-winged twitter-bird, 'Liz'beth worked for the slimysilver-tongued Brian Mulroney, way back in 1986-88. Ah, I remember those times...

'Liz'beth "looks back fondly and with pride" upon the good environmental deeds done by old smoothy --- albeit, with some reservations about NAFTA... Now, I'll grant you that Mulroney did tag along far behind Jimmy Carter's administration which introduced legislation to address the CFC-ozone problem ten years before the Montreal Protocol 1. But you can't credit Mulroney with solving the acid rain problem. That problem was solved by moving steel production and many other polluting industries to Asia and other places where labour and life are cheap.

The real kicker, the thing that exposes the lying ways of all our politicians, was the collapse of the greatest fishery the world ever had. That happened on the Mulroney watch. The watch that 'Liz'beth so fondly remembers and so proudly served.

Of course, the collapse was a long time in the making. Liberal Governments were also culpable. The high-faluting, superior-than-thou European Union was culpable. They all support the notions of: unbounded economic growth, unbounded population growth, and unbounded trade. Taken together, those things were a vast plunder that caused the demise of Cod on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Have politicians, any of them, learned the limits of growth?

Not 'Liz'beth. Not Justin. Not Conservatives. Not the NDP. Regardless of all the contrary evidence, they all force upon us their belief that we must increase population, and grow the economy, and that moralizing green will someday save the environment...

The cod have gone but the plunder continues.

So I ask you: Is it reasonable, or even ethical, to believe political and religious ideologies, or anything else, for which there is no evidence?

As far as the evidence goes, it seems to me that there are few politicians, even fewer broadcasters and virtually no economists, who meet the standard that reason requires for belief: www.memelyceum.com/documents/ethics_of_belief.pdf

Postscript

A google search threw up this vomit on the first page. An economist calling out ecologists for using models that don't make accurate predictions. Yet another economist who would do better to ponder the predictive piety of his own puke...