All Episodes
Previous Next
June 8, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
24:51
Canada Fires Up The "Climate Change" Fear-Mongers

Freedom must be vigilantly defended. Each day provides an opportunity for people in power to take it away. No matter what the incident, authoritarians propagandize fear; always with the end result of them being granted more power and money. Today, it's fires in Canada. If the government doesn't "do something," we won't have a planet to live on anymore. It's up to the people to know better. Freedom must be vigilantly defended.

|

Time Text
Lightning Fires and CO2 Controversy 00:09:50
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Chris Rossini, our co-host.
Chris, welcome to the program.
Great to be with you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
You know, we had a couple of subjects today that we were going to talk about, but there's sort of a big issue going on right now, and it's affected the entire country almost, but especially in the Northeast, and that is there's smoke all over the place, and we're going to try to sort all this out.
Who caused this smoking?
Are they smoking too many cigarettes or too much marijuana?
Maybe the interpretation of what's going on, they might be smoking something that causes them to come across because it's so simple for those people who think that mankind, civilization, causes all these problems, and therefore it's up to government to solve them because they're in the business of building up government.
That is the goal.
So that's what's going on now.
Where in the world did this come from and all this fire?
And it's probably worse than average, might be one of the worst.
We understand that.
But you know, the first thing I look at when we see problems like this is who owns it?
Whose property is it?
Who's messing up?
Could it have been prevented?
Well, there's a lot you can't prevent.
This idea that we, as a people, can control the weather.
And the radicals say, yes, you can.
It's all caused by mankind.
It's global warming and it's also climate change.
You know, they quit saying it's too hot.
There's climate warming, and therefore it's all due to what the government...
They dropped that because they couldn't prove that the globe was actually getting warmer.
So they sort of dropped that.
So they talk about climate change and climate control.
And that's a little more vague.
And they can attack.
And then they come up and say, well, it's CO2.
And they would say that CO2 is like 99, the way I hear them talk, 99% of the problem.
Too much CO2, too much civilization.
And that is the problem.
I don't think it's that simple.
I believe very strongly in pollution control.
And we've had a lot of advancements made by that.
And that, I think, is good.
But this whole thing about climate control, that there was a failure in climate control, and we've allowed too many things that people do that create CO2.
Well, if they really want to get rid of CO2, you know, they're talking about getting rid of all the cattle in the world.
But guess what?
Mankind produces CO2.
That's how we live.
We live bathing our lungs and our throat and our environment with CO2 because that's a byproduct of living.
But it's been turned into the greatest poison in the world.
And they said all we have to do is start regulating people.
So when a climate problem comes up, they want to take advantage of those who like to find solutions.
And those are the big government people.
And this is just falling on their laps.
Look how horrible this is.
And it's all because they wouldn't listen to it.
And it's an opportunity for us.
Don't let this emergency, that's going on now, go to waste.
Let's use it.
So now is the time to get rid of all those doubters about climate change and convince them that they better straighten up or the world will end next week.
So this is where we are today.
They're making use of it.
And that's not to belittle the seriousness, but it would be good if we had a very objective look at what's going on with the weather and these sort of things.
And I think there's a lot of objectivity out there, but there's a lot of misinformation.
And so that's the job sorting it out and then deciding who's really leveling with us and who doesn't have an agenda.
Why are they making chaos?
And some people, just like big government, they like regulations.
And this will invite more regulations, not less.
And I like to think about this, and I'll talk a little bit about this later on, about who owns the forest.
And maybe we'll check in and find out exactly who is literally responsible for managing the forest and trying to limit forest fires.
Chris?
Right, Dr. Paul, yes, we have a new thing.
It's Canada fires.
And of course, the climate fear mongers are out in full force, as you mentioned.
And, you know, you never want to let a crisis go to waste.
You want to try to get your political points in while you can.
You only have a short window to capitalize when emotions are high.
And the goal is always the same.
Give the biggest government in the history of the world, the biggest welfare state, the biggest overextended empire in the world, give them more power and more money.
That's always the end result that they want.
And if you don't, well, then the world is going to end.
No more planet for you.
And it's the same thing.
We just keep repeating this process, rinse and repeat.
We just went through it with COVID.
Do this, wear this, stand this far away, get all these vaccines.
It was all nonsense.
But that's what it's like to live under the biggest government in the history of mankind.
You're constantly barraged over and over and over, and you got to make it through.
You've got to be vigilant with your freedom and protect it because after the smoke clears, pun intended, and the smoke will clear, we're going to be okay.
But the next thing is going to happen, and they're just going to repeat this process over.
Fear and give them more power and money.
You know, the ownership of the forest lands, when you check into it, I found out that a large number of private owners are involved in the forest lands in the United States.
Matter of fact, more than half, there's 56%, I believe, is in the hands of private individuals and forestry people.
And they have an incentive.
I think private ownership is a good way to protect the environment because private owners have something at stake other than political maneuvering and manipulation and demagoguing.
And so that's not too bad under the circumstances that we live with today to have that much forestry land owned by individuals.
Of course, the leftists, especially the cultural and economic Marxists, they don't like to hear about it.
But what about Canada?
You know, they're causing a little bit of grief for some people if they have mismanaged anything with their forest.
And I don't know the details of what they do, but I do know that the reports are that the government manages and owns 96% of the forests in Canada, a lot more.
There were reports years ago.
I haven't seen them as recently.
I don't know exactly what the status is.
But government regulation, sometimes even when they're not owned, might regulate management of forests.
And private owners tended to burn brush in between their trees more often than the government.
The government and the environmentalists let it go, which meant that when there was a lightning strike, it was more likely to be, you know, start a major fire.
I imagine there's still some of that because regulations don't always work the way they think they should work.
So they've done that for years.
And so the big thing is, has there been mismanagement of the forest in Canada?
And since there's more government, my guess would be probably so.
And that means you don't ignore all the other factors.
But it would be an important thing to see what privately owned forests look like with pure government-owned forests and see who has the most fires.
Even that doesn't answer all the questions because there might be more lightning in one area than the other area.
And I was listening to a program today coming in a viewpoint from the left, and they say, it's lightning, we dismiss that because there's lightning.
It's what you do after the lightning hits.
Well, what if lightning causes it?
And what if the forest is designed where it's more likely to start if you have lightning?
But they don't want to talk about that, which means if they say, we don't need that, that's indifferent.
We have to know how to fight the fires and all this other.
So if they want to dismiss lightning as a major factor, I would suspect it must be pretty important because they don't want us to think about, you know, lightning.
But it is a serious problem.
There is no doubt.
And I think the fact that a lot of effort is made, I still think that long-term private ownership of land is a much better way to treat land.
You say, oh, you're not an environmentalist.
You wouldn't have the EPA or all these other things.
The truth is, the marketplace goes a long way to protecting private property.
And that is, you're responsible for it.
Dealing with Government Control 00:14:13
And if you're causing troubles to your neighbors and you're not managing things well and you're destroying the property next door, that's a different story.
But I think ownership and managements and desires are big different.
When it becomes bureaucratic and government ownership, that's more likely when the special interest becomes the nuisance and the problem.
Governments don't have a good reputation for managing anything.
It's pretty hard to find and say, boy, the one thing we do need for the government to do this is ABCD because we can't exist with that.
Even though everything they want usually involves stealing money from one group and giving it to the noisiest people in the other group that has the most political power.
So it's not a very good system.
And that's why I think in our effort to promote liberty, we should make sure that people understand that there's a lot of responsibility that falls on ownership of private property because their incentive is the highest compared to a bureaucrat who's only looking for more power.
Dr. Paul.
Yeah, great point.
Government.
They really do ruin whatever they interfere with.
That's why government is meant to be restrained by the Constitution.
But boy, did it break those chains and now it just runs wild.
And you could just go through any list of, look what they did to healthcare.
I mean, it's such a disgrace in this country.
But government, it invaded the industry and in league with the corporations and with the so-called agencies, FDA, CDC, they ruined it.
Student loans, education.
Everybody knows how bad government schools are, but look at student loans.
They were going to make it more accessible, more affordable.
Did the exact opposite, drove up the price, and everybody's buried in debt.
And now people who didn't take on the debt are expected to pay for it.
Foreign policy, COVID.
We could just go down a list all day long.
So we are supposed to think that this organization is going to manage the weather?
I mean, I don't even know how you get to that point.
Why would you think that they could do such a thing?
If there ever really was a climate crisis, you could be sure that government interference would find a way to make it worse.
So fortunately, there is no climate crisis outside of all the propaganda that we see.
But if government actually did try to do something about it, we'd end up learning that they only made it worse.
Very good.
You know, what is happening now coming from the far left fits into their so-called responsibilities because most coming from that, the far left, as well as many in the middle and even conservatives think, well, the purpose of government is to make us safe, to protect us.
And it can be domestically to protect us, you know, and therefore the welfare state is very necessary to protect people and make people safe.
And that's why you need a police.
That's why you need the FBI to make us safe.
That's why we need the CIA because they will make sure they can participate in justice because they're experts in assassinations and coups around the world.
So they go along.
It's always based on that.
But in this case, you know, it's part of this safety.
Climate control is a big deal, and there has to be a responsibility.
And only government can solve this problem.
It's never the government's fault.
But it's based on the fact that people say, well, that is true.
We want to be safe.
We don't want these fires.
And they say this is very bad.
So we need the government to make us safe from all forest fires forever.
But I think it also fits into the arguments of the far left and the corporatists and the people who like combined big government and big business and social media put it all together, which is a corporatism that I consider very, very dangerous.
But it also, they say that everything they're doing dealing with forest fires or COVID or well-intentioned.
You might buy into that.
I don't have to buy into it.
I think they're always, because they admit it, we have to take advantage of this, you know, and do something about it.
But a lot of people, though, do get brought in and they support it because it sounds like it's a good idea and we can't do it all by ourselves.
But you know, when COVID hit, people bought into this.
It took two or three years for the people to wake up and it was just overblown.
And the treatment was far worse than the disease.
And now it's being recognized and a lot of people are continuing to suffer from that bad attitude.
So now this comes along.
Nature's involved.
We don't have a virus to deal with or an imaginary disease at the moment.
But we have a fire that is chaotic and it's a mess.
So if they do something that is not necessarily helpful, but it builds the size and scope of government, and even if it's disruptive, the goal of cultural Marxists and the Marxists and the corporatists is to cause chaos.
Because people throw up their hands, which I do quite frequently, why are they doing this?
Look at the cities.
The cities are falling apart.
There's crimes that they don't investigate them.
At the same time, we say, oh, yeah, we have law and order.
We have set a precedent for the world.
We've impeached a president twice.
And that means we're tough on law and order.
And that's why we have to depend on our Department of Justice and the FBI to make us safe and secure.
But then what is done economically causes more chaos.
So if people jump in and say, this is the time we take over this global warming and global problems and weather problems, this opens up the door to doing anything and everything.
And whether it's chaotic or not, or if it is chaotic, that's good because that will always throw it back and say the people don't take care of themselves.
We even need more government.
But the contest is between those individuals now who are becoming more numerous, saying, no, this is proof-putting that big government may be the big problem that we have and we ought to deal with it.
And we always should be looking more for the solutions coming from private property ownership and peace and prosperity, which means that people should be owning land and dealing with their problems.
And maybe that's far superior to this authoritarian approach that we're using right now.
Chris?
Very good, Dr. Paul.
I'll finish up more on a philosophical note.
But it's what we talk about.
It's the role of government.
And there is a flawed mentality out there, mostly from the left, sometimes from the right, in this belief of perfection and that government progresses us with its laws and it can be used to perfect humanity.
And it's just not true.
Humans are imperfect, always will be.
We cannot create perfection.
No tool that we create can create perfection either because we're imperfect.
We're not going to create the perfect tool either.
So government is out as far as perfecting society and AI and anything else that we create.
But we can improve.
We can do better today than we did yesterday individually.
We can do better tomorrow than we do today.
But we can never be perfect because we're always ignorant.
We're always dissatisfied with something.
We come into conflicts with other people.
We may want the same thing.
We may want a thing to be used our way, whereas someone wants it used their way.
So conflict is a permanent part of our life here.
But, you know, those progressives, they just believe, oh, just write another law.
No matter what happens, you'll see them, oh, just write another law, another law.
But the counterintuitive part of that is that more laws create more conflicts.
They have so many laws right now that they can't even enforce them.
They probably don't even know most of them exist.
They just go look them up and see if it's convenient to use it at the moment.
So more laws will not perfect society either, even though this is their goal, and that's why they always constantly fail.
You know, the goal, our goal, is freedom.
Freedom is better.
Freedom does not create perfection.
We will not be perfect with freedom.
People will still be grumpy, unhappy, dissatisfied.
But it's much, much better than this authoritarianism that we live under because these small groups of people make decisions for everybody and then everybody has to suffer.
Very good.
And I'm going to follow up on that statement, Chris, very good description.
You know, when I look at the option of the far left and those who don't believe, as we do, in liberty and private property, that everything they do has to use force.
They don't do it through persuasion.
We're required in a freedom movement, a libertarian movement, that you change things and it has to be voluntary.
Unless somebody's committed a violence against one, then you can defend yourself.
But otherwise, all these things have to be voluntary, and two sides have to agree, whether it's economic matters, personal, social matters, religious matters, international, why not have all international associations being voluntary on both sides, rather than us saying that we're king of the hill and we're going to do our way.
And if we don't like that government, we'll participate in the coup and get you a better government.
And also, all these proposals by the far left and the authoritarians, and there's plenty in the conservative movement too, is it's based on theft.
People are now starting to wake up that there's a lot of waste and fraud and damage done by our militarism around the world.
But where did the money come?
It didn't come out of earnings by individuals voluntarily doing this.
It came from theft because the government has to steal it from the people.
Well, that's taxation.
They don't have enough, so they borrow it and delay it unless somebody else has to pay for it.
And then there's not enough borrowing, so they have to print it.
Then you pass on the tax to the people through inflation.
So it's all evil on the way it goes about.
And it sort of distracts from dealing with the problem that you have and how you solve the problems.
You can't solve the problems that we're faced with, whether a natural or man-made, by just saying the government's supposed to take care of it and they're supposed to use force.
They have the monopoly control of force.
And theft under these conditions isn't theft.
And I happen to think if you and I can't steal from our neighbors, we can't send our government to steal the neighbor.
But then when they go to get around to making decisions, whether it was under COVID or what, even though the arguments very early on were very strong to show that their approach, you know, in saying, well, we can't tolerate people who believe in natural immunity.
They're people who don't understand science.
So even if you ignore that typical problem, that if the well-intentioned go and think, well, the government has to do this, we have to lock down on all this, and our intentions are good.
But the whole thing is, when governments take over and they have a policy, regardless of their intention, they can make a mistake.
When they make a mistake, it's deadly.
If they start a war they don't need to have, just think of all the deadly mistakes we made in this century over the war issue.
It's very vicious.
When an individual, you say, you're going to turn it over an individual, individuals, they're not perfect.
They're going to make mistakes, right?
But they'll be less so, and there'll be less income-passing, affecting everybody.
When you have an authoritarian government and they make a mistake, whether it's an intended policy or they just think, well, we made a mistake, everybody gets that has to live under that law, suffers the consequence.
The consequence follows on everybody.
But in a free society, yes, there are consequences and problems, but it's limited to the individual, which gives an individual a lot of incentive to do the right sea.
And also, when this happens, when we accept this notion that government should be involved in dealing with COVID and international affairs and our climate, believe me, there is corruption.
And then the corporations move in, whether it's medical corporations or corporations in the banking industry, corporations dealing with pharmaceuticals.
So the government is there, and the country is very wealthy.
It's still pretty wealthy, but boy, I'll tell you what, it's getting weaker all the time.
We're getting poorer all the time.
So it will come to an end.
But over the years, the wealth has been overwhelming.
We have the reserve currency of the world, and people were quite willing to make use of it.
Well, good times are coming.
We're going to do it.
We just have to petition the government.
So they have to introduce this notion of corruption in government, gang up on them, tell them that pure democracy is the way to go, and yet democracy can be very, very damaging because the majority is not exactly smart when they can be organized against the weaker half of people who have to pay the bills.
Believes in Personal Liberty 00:00:33
So whether it's the climate problems that we have or problems with Ukraine or problems with the next virus crisis, we should look toward private ownership, individual liberty, and volunteerism in solving our problems based in a society that represents and believes in personal liberty.
And under those circumstances, I believe we have a chance to have a lot more peace and a lot more prosperity.
Export Selection