CBC’s Resident Subversive: Rex Murphy Rips Environmentalism

Rex Murphy was at his iconoclastic best the other night. Undermining years of CBC’s enviro-scare-mongering editorial policy, he rips into John Baird’s lightbulb jihad, Laurel Broten’s “Flick Off” campaign, Sheryl Crow’s one-square wipe, and enviro-freaks in general, in his Friday, April 27, 2007 “Point of View” Segment on CBC’s The National. Never afraid to get sharply to the point, this is how he starts: “Environmentalism robs people of their judgement.” Watch here and cheer!

Advertisements

30 Comments

Filed under Against the Grain, Over-Environmentalism

30 responses to “CBC’s Resident Subversive: Rex Murphy Rips Environmentalism

  1. EmZi

    Yay, Rex!

    I’m simply stunned by the Ontario government’s campaign. Stunned. If I ever needed motivation to get involved in provincial politics, this is it….unfortunately, there’s not much in terms of competition on the red Tory side.

    Good grief. People, this planet was made for us, not us for it. True, we need to take care of it, but we should use our good sense doing so. And those that never saw a microphone they never loved should take good stock of the energy consumption in their own palaces and motorcades before they start taking the splinter out of the common man’s eye for just trying to get by.

  2. wallyj

    Well said Rex and Emzi. I am glad to be at the top of the food chain and will take REASONABLE actions to keep my place. But to run amok and emasculate myself on the altar of equality for men and trees and chickens and seals and that guy that pushes the shopping cart while talking to his GOD,that is counter-productive to my continued happiness. It is time that we on the “right” insist on our rights. My most important right is to be happy,the next one is not to pay for yours. Cheers.

  3. Jeff

    The planet was not made for us, stop being so self-centered. Regardless, eco-hysteria is not the way to go.

  4. OfficialPro

    heh, when my brother and I were watching MuchMusic the other day, my brother commented that if the guy was going to wear a shirt that said f*** off, he might as well say it. I turned to look at the TV (from the Computer) and went, “Oh, it’s FLICK Off!”

    My brother is in his mid 20’s and he thought the whole “Flick off” campaign was incredibly stupid, including the bit about ninjaing bumper stickers on “idling” cars–which he reasoned would cause some form of road rage among victims of said stickers.

  5. looks like

    fuck off

    to me

    Typical of libs, It looked moreso when she’s in a small pic beside rex.

    Envirnonmentalism is a madness.

    Not sure its worth the 70$ I pay the CBC annually.

  6. Gavin

    “Environmentalism robs people of their judgement.”

    What an ignorant blanket-statement. There is no proof that once you call yourself an environmentalist or ascribe to their principles that you are suddenly robbed of your judgment. That is just idiotic.

    What is true is modern human society, at it’s full scale, has a very harmful effect on the environment around us. Is it all our fault? No, the world naturally cycles CO2 and other greenhouses gases. Are we speeding the process? Yes. Since climate tracking began we have seen a greater jump in the ammount of GHG (green house gases) in our atmosphere, we trace this cause to the industrialized world.

    Granted, given these facts, the powerful government officials and corporate CEO’s are going to attempt to exploit not only the finacial aspect but the public relations aspect of the whole fiasco. It sounds like you guys just have an over-zealous political official who isn’t looking at the larger industrial implications of global warming and is instead forcing working people to “change their ways.” with overly simplistic and wholly ineffective policies.

  7. Krillin

    Hey, Gaia is one tough b***ch!! :p

  8. Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com

  9. allocator

    There’s nothing wrong with environmentalism, at the very least it’s shining a light on the sheer waste and damage associated with our consumption.

    I think Rex Murphy was mostly taking on the hypocricy and lack of judgement being displayed by some politicians and entertainers – not environmentalism itself.

    Whether we’re the ones heating up the earth or if it’s just a natural cycle doesn’t really matter at this point. Either way, hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes are going to be increasingly ripping up our shit as the warming trend continues. Whether we like it or not, this is something we have to better prepare for and/or adapt to.

    Sooner or later, our infrastructures are going to get hit enough times that they just aren’t going to come back up quickly or easily. Ever tried to live for weeks without electricity? or running water?

    Pontificating and silly public figures or not, we still have a lot of work to do. Conserving, reducing pollution wherever we can, and being a little more prepared for climate-change effects strike me as still being well within the realm of common sense and smart living.

    Cheers,
    George

  10. Rex Murphy should go flick himself

  11. What a predictable bore Rex has become. How does the cbc manage to turn its talent into self-regurgitating parodies of themselves so deftly? Now over to the afternoon radio to listen to more people writing letters about how quaint they are. Cheaper than journalism and self stroking too. kool.

  12. The Babble counterattacks!

    To allocator: Rex was certainly doing more than attacking pontificating hypocrites; he most certainly attacked environmentalism itself. For God’s sake, his opening line was “Environmentalism robs people of their judgement.” He couldn’t make it any more clear who his target was: environmentalists. Period.

    To Len and rock: cheap shots without substance aren’t welcome here. Happy to debate the issues if you want to get serious.

  13. jessn050

    EmZi, wow, you said it perfect. Why would we be given a planet that would fall apart on us?

  14. arctic_front

    “Environmentalism robs people of their judgement.”

    What an ignorant blanket-statement. There is no proof that once you call yourself an environmentalist or ascribe to their principles that you are suddenly robbed of your judgment. That is just idiotic.

    looks like more than a few of the commentors in this thread are exactly that…..robbed.

    Time to wake up, people…the sky is not falling….and short of a nulcear holocaust, un-likely to do so.

    If you need to understand the real reason for all this global warming nin-sense….ask yourself just one simple question: Follow the Money!

  15. Ed Mathison

    The equivalence in destructiveness of global warming and the Second World War originated in the Stern Review (an economic analysis of the effects of global warming undertaken for the British Government0. Given the recent premature death’s of 33,000 people in Europe, due to an unprecedented heat wave, and the likely loss of 25% of Africa’s agricultural productivity (given a 2 Degees rise in temperature by the end of the century) the death toll due to climated change may well equal that of the Second World War. Although we will not be directly responsible for these death ( the linkages between CO2 emmissions and climate changw are indirect) we will certainly be complicit.

    Secondly, it has been well established that there has been a well funded campaign to discredit the science of climate change. ExxonMobil, as documented by The Union of Concerned Scientist, spent approximately 16 million dollars to discredit or minimize the science of global change. To quote Aldern Meyer of the Union “ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes for global warming just as the tobacco companies denied their product causes cancer.” Although scientists must provide verifiable evidence for their finding as well as have them reviewed by their peers the same is not so for politician, public interest groups and journalists. This has allowed climate change skeptics standing in the public debate debate while they lack credibility in the scientific debate. Although there is little uncertainty in the scientific debate, because of this campaign of disinformation, public policy has been unnecessarily hampered. To deny that there has been this attempt to discredit the science of global climate change does the public a disservice.

  16. If you want to talk about monetary incentives, let’s look at the Global Warming industry. Start with Al Gore’s carbon-credit scheme. Then look at who is getting the research grants – Global Warming pushers, or skeptics?

    I could care less whether ExxonMobil or “right-wingers” paid for the research or not – I care about science and truth. And as far as I can see, the truth lies on the side of the skeptics.

    If you need to believe in a coming apocalypse, go ahead. You obviously do not follow a religion, because if you did, you would understand that only God, and not man, can bring on the apocalypse. So relax, stop being so miserable, and live a productive life! Count your blessings, man! And learn to be happy!

  17. spark

    Hypocritical much? You don’t care whether ExxonMobil pays for research even though they have a clear vested interest to produce “skeptical” work, but you certainly do care if research grants go to Global Warming pushers because… why exactly? Because they can then get more and more research grants? If monetary recompense was their only true calling, I would think the overflowing teats of the Big Oil would be a much more rewarding suckle.

    Not to mention your concern about science and truth ring hollow. Yours and Rex Murphy’s hallowed “judgement” has nothing to do with neither science nor truth. Judgement is about authority and decree and some form of permanence, which only at the rarest and best of times has anything remotely to do with truth and never anything to do with science. Science is always theoretical and ALWAYS falsifiable. Judgement, predicated on static authority, can only ever be overturned.

    So Rex is right, environmentalism does “rob one of their judgement”, but science and environmentalism doesn’t claim to do otherwise. Because life and the world and everything in it is ever-changing (empirically and verifiably so), life is always a calculated risk assessment. Only the truly wise reserve their final judgement. If you and Rex want to complain about your inability to be ignorant and foolish, go ahead. Nobody’s stopping you. Just don’t misrepresent anything while you’re at it. Somebody just might leave a haughty comment on your obscure blog.

  18. Whoa, you completely lost me until the last line, when you got your “obscure blog” crack in. I have no pretentions of this blog being anything more than it appears – it’s averaging 100 visitors a day and I’m proud of even that.

    Anyway, I’ll leave you with the same advice I left the previous doomsday monger: Relax, stop being so miserable, and live a productive life! Count your blessings, man! And learn to be happy!

  19. spark

    First, who are you to say whether or not I am happy, relaxed, etc…?

    Second, coming from somebody who spills quite a lot of cyber-ink on the so-called “War on Terror”, and Mahar Arar’s alleged terrorist links, and all things super-scary in the world of creeping “islamofascism”, your telling me to “Relax, stop being so miserable, and live a productive life! Count your blessings, man! And learn to be happy!” is really. really. REALLY. rich.

    Really. Mongering indeed.

    Third, if you really did care so much about science you would know that values-based “judgements” of the sort Rex and you pine after have nothing to do with science/environmentalism whatsoever. That was my whole point. Pardon me for trying to elevate the discourse around here.

    And lastly, my so-called “crack” had less to do with ripping on your obscurity, which 100 visitors a day invariably is, and more to do with self-deprecatingly calling on my haughtiness. I suppose like so much I write that went right over your head as well.

    Too bad. Better luck next time.

  20. “I suppose like so much I write that went right over your head as well.”

    I’ll worry about understanding your thoughts when you learn proper grammar. In the meantime, I’ll consider you what you are: a willfully-blind useful idiot, full of bluster that signifies nothing.

    And I know you’re not a happy person. It’s not that hard to tell.

  21. MA

    spark,

    re: 100 visitors a day, Flaggman has the right attitude.

    There’s an ancient saying that “the only gift without increase is that which is without thanksgiving”.

    It would profit Flaggman nothing to have 10,000 visitors a day and be ungrateful for whatever his blessings are (and everyone has them).

  22. Francesca

    Is Spark an academic on drugs? Someone who skipped debate and logic classes, and all those other evil western linear things? His entries go absolutely nowhere and are fueled by a petty need to constantly criticize. but I guess they are fueled by some sort of mindless brain paralyzing relativism that doesn’t allow you to reach informed well thought out judgments. So yes you champion ignorance Spark, but remember you can be so open minded that your brains fall out. Stand for something or you’ll fall for everything.

    I am incredibly grateful to Murphy. Especially living in California, where eco facists want to force, without a vote, mercury filled fluorescent lights on everyone. Which can’t be safely thrown away or recycled as incandescents can. This is also an example of how environmentalist solutions end up actually being bad for the environment. Because the real goal of environmentalism is control, fear mongering, and destruction of individual rights, especially property ownership. Gee this is kinda why we need the good sense to make informed judgments after all.

  23. Kirk Anderson

    Debate about the Pollution of our lands, waterways and air has been pushed aside by the Global warming debate.

    I have listened to both sides and each presents good and sometimes powerful reasons why we should listen to them.

    I am no scientists so the debate in scientific terms confounds me.

    From what I have seen and heard, the rancour and name calling by both sides chill me.

    There does not seem to be an honest debate going on by either side.

    The average person, I believe, does not know who to believe.

  24. Ron

    Hey people you are talking about the CBC, anything they can do to make their shows more lively is good.

  25. Don Jessy

    “hideous propaganda” indeed. The CBC, which Rex purportedly works for, is becoming more and more a promoter of fiction for public information – a brainwashing machine selling current economic baflegarb ideology, as though there is no other option.

  26. This design is steller! You most certainly know how to keep a reader amused.
    Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own blog (well, almost.

    ..HaHa!) Excellent job. I really enjoyed what you had to say, and more than that, how you presented it.
    Too cool!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s