Again

[Britain’s energy and climate change minister, Ed] Miliband has acknowledged that he is a sinner. Today he joined the Right Reverend James Jones, bishop of Liverpool, and the Right Reverend Dr Richard Chartres, bishop of London, to issue a statement calling for a carbon fast this Lent. ...

The carbon fast is a semi-conscious attempt to turn environmentalism into a caricature of a religion. The idea of original sin has been reinvented as a wicked act of ‘carbon emission’. There are a number of ways that the green sinner can gain absolution. Those with lots of money can win redemption by purchasing ‘carbon offsets’; the rest of us will have to go through various rituals: recycling garbage, avoiding disposable nappies, using reusable bags, all of which provide proof of our sacrifice and faith. Those most committed to the faith will go further, of course, and stop eating meat and having babies. Those who refuse to embrace any of the above rituals are stigmatised for their moral depravity and denounced for committing crimes against the planet. The main purpose of the carbon fast, it seems, is to make people feel guilty about the fact that they have a life. ...

At a time when government ministers and leaders of the Church embrace gimmicks such as a ‘carbon fast’, it is important to remind ourselves that moralising about our lifestyles will do little to improve the environment. On the contrary, this stigmatisation of human ambition undermines our confidence to experiment and innovate and to develop the techniques and practices that will put problems right. Instead of adopting the role of make-believe penitents, we should be encouraging society to invest in innovation and research. Instead of bowing to the divine authority of the planet, we ought to uphold the age-long project of humanising the planet.

The Brits are barmy, but so are the Yanks. I speak in support of human diversity, but that doesn't mean that I am unaware that millions or billions of people are totally bonkers. Indeed, it is acute awareness of this that makes diversity important, a means to buffer the harm that any cult can do by gaining too much power. Are the greens worse than the creationists? Who cares? They're both disastrous for society if they have much influence.

Whenever government gets cozy with religion - no matter if it's the weak tea sort the Brits imbibe or the stronger stuff that Yanks prefer - nothing but trouble results. Coupled with the zealotry of greens even the Brits become berserkers. A worst case scenario would be if the Yanks - already given to a more muscular sort of worship - lay down with the greens. If you fear Islamofascists you should be sweating blood at the thought of an evangelical-green alliance.

We have muddle minded bumblers in government, no matter which side you dress on, but they all thirst for greater power. They can't do the job they have, so they try to get promoted. So far we have avoided the worst since the greens and the more conventionally religious have been in opposition, mostly due to existing strange-bedfellow alliances which could end in a moment. There's no cure for any of the diverse zealotries, but the harm that they can do - especially in convenient though temporary alliance - can be reduced by limiting the power of the government in all cases. I suspect that these ideas, though not at all novel, are better understood now than they were only a couple of months ago, and that many more will twig to them as time passes.