There are plenty of reasons to look upon the “climate change” circus conference in Copenhagen with worried skepticism: the smug narcissism of its participants, the deliberate spreading of unwarranted fear and paranoia, and calls for (surprise, surprise) more taxes, more regulations, and more government.

But the one that stands out to me is the claim that carbon dioxide is a “pollutant” that must be limited. This is one of the most illogical and irrational statements I have ever heard.

Life itself is the product of carbon and its exchange between other living beings. Animals exhale carbon, which is absorbed by plants, who then supply the rest of us with the oxygen we need to survive. Every decision and action we make leaves a “carbon footprint” no matter how human beings acquire their energy.

The sole reason we are being told that CO2 is a threat to human life is because of the power this will give the state to monitor, regulate, spy on, and control our lives and ultimately the free and voluntary actions that are the cornerstones of our individual liberty.

Carbon is the essence of life, yet our “leaders” have the gall to tell us that the expenditure of energy (carbon dioxide) is somehow a bad thing? “Carbon dioxide emissions” have produced philosophy, literature, a greater standard of living for millions of people, cheaper products and services that are essential to civilization (food, water, shelter), and millions of technological innovations that have benefited mankind immensely. Rejecting “carbon footprints” is essentially denying the biological facts of life and progress.

Even if human actions were somehow threatening a planet that has shrugged off comets, ice ages, the magnetic reversal of the poles, and continuous bombardment by solar rays, the expansion of government control would not be the answer. After all, the US government is by far the biggest polluter in the history of the world.

It’s easy to see why a coercive monopoly would do the most damage to the land it controls; like a thief inside a diamond shop, its aim is to get in and get out with as much short-term loot as possible. When property is privately owned, however, there is an incentive for good care, investment in labor and resource saving technology, and the right to sue anyone who invades or pollutes that property.

The Copenhagen crowd wants the world in a panic over a gas that makes up about .04% of the atmosphere, and demand that states all around the world employ more violence against their citizens in order to reduce its levels.

While ignoring the ugly environmental collectivism that they prescribe, we should instead affirm life and increase our carbon footprint.

_

For more of Robert’s work, please visit his Libertarian Examiner blog.

» You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.