A Dutch court ordered its government on Wednesday to cut the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by a minimum of 25 percent by the year 2020. The ruling by The Hague District Court could be the basis for similar cases around the world, according to the director of the renewable energy group Urgenda, the entity that took the government to court on behalf of 900 citizens.
This decree comes hard on the heels of Pope Francis’ encyclical urging nations to quickly overhaul their economies (what could possibly go wrong?) in order to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The Dutch court said that based on current government climate policy, the country will cut its emissions by “only” 17 percent by 2020.
Wendel Trio, director of Climate Action Network Europe, said, “The verdict is a milestone in the history of climate legislation, because it is the first time that a government was ordered to raise its climate ambition by a court. We hope this kind of legal action will be replicated in Europe and around the world.”
Yes, that is exactly what the world needs, un-elected courts ordering the people’s elected representatives around under penalty of law, annexing their freedom. Just like in the United States!
A U.N. climate science panel has previously stated that the world must cut emissions by some 40 to 70 percent by 2050.
The Dutch plaintiffs argued that the government has a legal, constitutional obligation to protect its people against looming dangers, including the effects of climate change. But that same government does not, apparently, have a similar obligation to protect its people against such nebulous and distant threats as Russia or Islamic terrorism.
If mankind survives for much longer, this will be seen as a most confusing era. Our priorities are comically or tragically screwed up, depending on one’s perspective. Vast majorities are letting themselves be marginalized by tiny minorities of environmentally “progressive,” statist, would-be tyrants.
We know that there have been naturally occurring ice ages and warm periods alternating over the course of many thousands of years, yet we are letting pseudo-scientists potentially panic us into economic ruin on the basis of a few decades worth of “cooked” temperature readings.
Just 40 years ago, during the 1970’s, scientists were predicting doom by way of massive global cooling. Where would we be today had we taken that “threat” to heart and acted rashly?
An interesting question, is it not?