How’s everyone enjoying their politicized heat waves this year?

By: Rachel Marsden

PARIS — Fresh off the latest French riots, the country didn’t even have time to catch its breath before being bombarded with nanny state heat-wave alerts. I just sat in my air conditioned apartment, chillin’ like a villain — whose superpower is being impervious to air conditioning-related guilt trips.

In addition to panic over pretty typical summer heat, the season has also become a time to dredge up tales of heat-related mass casualties like the “deadly summer of 2003” when the French had all taken off for their usual paid vacations, leaving the elderly in non-air-conditioned care homes vulnerable to an intense heat wave.

Given that incident occurred 20 years ago, you’d think that we’d have stopped talking about heat waves by now — if only because a hallmark of human evolution has always been the ability to adapt to our environment. In the case of extreme heat, that would logically mean availing oneself of the available modern technological tools to cool off.

Personally, that means two portable air conditioners for my Paris apartment which have sparked a revolt among the elderly residents in my building who can see the air evacuation tubes in windows. One wrote on behalf of all the others to the building management last year complaining about the impact on the environment. But then when we crossed paths in the building’s entrance, her frustrations boiled over revealing a more discreet motivation. “How can you possibly afford TWO air conditioners?” she yelled.

Indeed, even in France, where energy costs have skyrocketed ever since Europe cut itself off from its cheap Russian energy supply, it’s still possible to run a couple of air conditioners for about the price of a daily trip to Starbucks. It’s really just a matter of priorities. As for air conditioning units sold on the European market representing any kind of significant environmental risk — if that was the case, they would already be banned. Perhaps instead of the government educating citizens about how to obsess over the opening and closing of their windows and blinds from dawn to dusk, in order to reduce the daily sweltering to a minimum, they should be addressing the many misconceptions about air conditioning long held by the French. That seems to be the best possible solution to climate change, frankly.

Anything else is a gamble. You can control the temperature of your home — sort of. But there’s just no way that anyone can possibly control the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere. Nor can anyone credibly quantify precisely how someone not recycling their Coke cans is directly going to impact it. So far, none of the environmental authoritarianism we’ve faced for the past few decades has worked. Doing more of the same is just idiotic. Unlike turning on the air conditioning at home — which provides instant personal relief from climate change.

Former US President Barack Obama said in a recent interview that his 24-year-old daughter, Malia, said to him that there’s “just no way that we’re going to solve this.” Meaning that the goal of world leaders under the Paris Agreement of keeping under the 2 degree Celsius rise of planetary atmospheric temperature compared to pre-industrial levels is just not going to happen. The next step is to ask why that is. Could it possibly be because ignorant narcissists who figure that humans are in total control of the Earth’s heating and cooling cycles are either delusional, or have another agenda that involves using the planet as a pretext for taxing and controlling other people?

Instead, Obama doubled down on the globalist narrative. “Look, we may not be able to cap temperature rise to two degrees centigrade,” he said. Why not? If you’re following “the science,” then why isn’t it working? “But here’s the thing,” Obama continued. “If we work really hard, we may be able to cap it at two and a half instead of three, or three instead of three and a half.” So, despite clearly having zero mastery of planetary temperature control, the goal is now to do so within half-degree precision? “That extra centigrade, that might mean the difference between whether Bangladesh is underwater,” Obama continued.

These folks seem to be making it up as they go along. And why not, as long as citizens are still willing to accept the climate-related guilt trip imposed on them as an excuse to be robbed blind.

The average Western citizen is so brainwashed that they’ll now sit around sweltering in their own apartment, martyring themselves so that Bangladesh doesn’t end up underwater someday like Obama said. But at least if they’re focused on that — and at yelling at the neighbor who avails themselves of modern climate control — then they likely won’t be asking hard questions of the government that’s constantly asking them to sacrifice their own money, basic rights, and comfort for causes exactly like this one that never seem to improve.