Don't look now, the “climate crisis” is officially over. No need to take my word for it. Just ask Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic standard-bearer, who “only” mentioned the topic in her acceptance speech at the recent Democratic National Convention, according to the New York Times. [emphasis, links added]
The Times also pointed out Harris “has not proposed any new policies to combat climate change.”
How far we have come in just five years. In 2019, before the pandemic, inflation and anti-Semitic demonstrations on college campuses became big issues at the time, the United States was thriving in political calm.
and [the 2020] At the start of the presidential campaign, Democratic candidates and their allies needed something to talk about in the corporate media, so they chose climate change. CNN even spent seven hours covering a “Climate Crisis Town Hall.”
Every candidate seeking the Democratic nomination, including Harris, has warned of the dangers posed by climate change. She called the matter “an existential threat to us as human beings” and declared that she “Prepare to break free from obstruction to pass the Green New Deal.” There is no ambiguity there.
Fast forward to today, and existential crises are ignored. No matter where one falls on the climate change spectrum, it’s hard to ignore this paradox. What was once the biggest problem is no longer a problem, and there are three possible explanations.
The first is cynical: climate change has never been a crisis, but an opportunity. National gas prices are around $2 per gallon. The inflation rate is 1.7%. There is no war in Ukraine or Israel. President Donald Trump enjoys popularity and success.
Democrats need an issue they can own. They need a crisis to convince voters they deserve the power.
Labeling climate change “existential” gives it seriousness and intellectual nobility: climate change is a huge threat that only we are smart enough to realize. Trump is too arrogant and too caveman to care about something as profound and extremely serious as climate change. This is their plan.
Inventing a crisis just to win votes and using a solution that upends daily life — no more combustible engines or red meat — is deeply cynical, but that’s what Democrats do.
The second reason for ignoring the “climate crisis” this election cycle is no better: poor performance in climate change polls.
In a national poll, it ranked 19th among the most important topics to voters. Harris' DNC speech was carefully crafted for the polls. Free Palestine is gaining attention as it polls well with the crowd.
Fear of the mysterious “Project 2025,” considered a playbook for Trump and his fellow right-wing extremists, must be put to the test because it is mentioned so many times.
This explanation is also worrying because it means Harris would rather hide the truth about her “existential crisis” (her words, not mine) than risk losing power.
The left is trying to brand “Kamala” as “Momala”, but no mother would rather risk upsetting her child by concealing a child's health diagnosis.
If climate change is an existential threat, make it clear. Former presidential candidates from both political parties did not shy away from the major challenges of their time.
Franklin Roosevelt warned of the dangers posed by Nazi Germany. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan all spoke of the Soviet threat, arguing that the American people needed truth, not coddling. The American people deserve the full truth— if Their existence is literally in danger.
Whether through cynicism or outright ambition, the climate agenda is endlessly manipulated by those seeking power and money.
The third reason Kalama Harris puts climate change on the back burner is that the problem has already been solved. This is of course ridiculous.
If the Biden-Harris administration tackles climate change, America will see parades of ribbons and massive celebrations. This would be the first data point in Harris' ascension to the presidency.
No, the Biden-Harris administration is not “fixing” the climate, which leaves the previous two options: Either Harris is dishonestly using climate change to scare voters into compliance, or she is ignoring the greatest threat of our time because it jeopardizes her political goals.
Both are disgraceful and demeaning to the American people. Both represent “a real threat to our democracy” because they leave the whole truth in the dark. Both were disqualified.
Of course, Harris herself can tell us why she suddenly ignored climate issues. But there are no good answers. This is just another example of her avoiding the media and the public.
Whether through cynicism or outright ambition, the climate agenda is endlessly manipulated by those seeking power and money.
This election cycle has made it clear that whatever may happen with climate change, it certainly doesn’t “exist.” Given Harris' silence on the issue, she clearly agrees.
Read the Federalist Papers to learn more
