Ruminations

We can safely dismiss the idea that the right has carefully weighed the scientific evidence and concluded that the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is wrong. We can also dismiss the idea that conservatives have carefully examined the economics of emission controls and concluded that they are too expensive. ... [T]he ferocity with which the right opposes any policy to limit greenhouse gases, even the nearly empty Bush plan, goes beyond general anti-environmentalism. What's different about global warming, I think, is that unlike local pollution, dealing with it requires concerted action by governments around the world. And that's what the right really can't stand.

But what happens when unilateralists encounter problems that clearly require the cooperation of other countries — not as junior partners, but as equals? Right now the answer is simply to deny the existence of those problems. The greenhouse effect is a quintessentially global issue — fine, we'll deny that global warming exists. Fighting stateless terrorists demands a global cooperative effort — fine, we'll fight terrorism by launching a conventional war against a regime that, nasty as it was, had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.