This Netflix show is just releasing its fourth season where I live, and it promises a look into climate political intrigue. For those not familiar, the historical protagonist of Borgen is Birgitte Nyborg (Sidse Babett Knudsen), who in Season 1 became the first woman to take up the post of Prime Minister in Denmark. She portrays a determined politician, shrewd and willing to engage in political street fighting in order to gain and to keep power. She is also an avatar of the progressive globalist contemporary leader, embracing the woke ideology of diversity, nanny state intervention, and of course saving the planet from CO2.
This new season presents a juicy predicament for Birgitte, who is now Foreign Minister under another female PM. The fourth season opens with the discovery of major oil fields in Greenland. Local politicians announce this without first consulting with their Danish counterparts – a problem of no small importance, since the international interests of the island are the responsibility of the government of Denmark. It’s also a bit of a headache for Birgitte, who was elected under a program that promised commitment to fighting climate change and therefore shouldn’t defend Greenland’s desire to exploit this unexpected new resource.
This is further complicated when, discussing it with other Nordic colleagues, Birgitte discovers that Russia and China would have interests linked to the Greenlandic issue, making a situation that was far from easy from the start even more delicate. Birgitte’s knee-jerk public statement in response to the oil discovery is along the lines: “We’ve committed ourselves to zero emissions by 2050, and this can’t be allowed to defeat that achievement.” That zero legislation was enacted so as to belong in the Globalist ranks, without any critical examination of IPCC dubious suppositions.
Meanwhile, the Greenlanders are enthralled with the prospect of prosperity and a leap forward in their standard of living. Presumably the writers will have their avatar win by holding to her progressive line, so a St. Paul Damascus awakening is highly unlikely in the coming episodes.
Still, stranger things have happened, such as the satirical blast of lucidity in the final episode of the BBC TV show, Yes, Prime Minister.
Update Dec. 2019 Yes PM Pokes Fun at Climatism
GWPF published a letter from the late Sir Antony Jay, co-creator of Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minster, attacking the BBC for its blatant bias on climate change 8 years ago. It seems timely to repost the final episode from the final season addressing the topic of global warming/climate change. As you see, climate politics have not changed very much.
Part 1 of the program is here:
Previously I posted this:
A humorous look at why the global warming campaign and the triumphal Paris COP make sense.
Yes Minister explains it all in an episode from 2013. This is an all-too-realistic portrayal of political climatism today.
When I realized that BBC had blocked the viewing of the video, I sought and found the subtitles for Yes Prime Minister 2013, Episode 6, “A Tsar is Born”. That final episode for the series began with the dialogue in the first video above.
Below is the dialogue that formed the episode conclusion, and which was the content of the blocked video.
The Characters are:
Sir Humphrey Appleby
Special Policy Adviser
Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister
(Dialogue beginning at 20:16 of “A Tsar is Born”)
Humphrey I have returned with the answer to all your problems.
Jim I thought you were against it?
Humphrey Everybody’s against it, Prime Minister.
I suddenly realised that is the beauty of it.
We can get a unanimous agreement with all of our European partners
to do something about it.
Jim But how can we do something about
something that isn’t happening?
Humphrey It’s much easier to solve an
imaginary problem than a real one.
Jim You believe it’s real?
Humphrey Do you? I don’t know.
Jim Neither do I. Haven’t got the faintest idea!
Humphrey But it doesn’t matter what we think.
If everyone else thinks it’s real, they’ll all want to stop it.
So long as it doesn’t cost too much.
So the question now is, what are we going to do about it?
Jim But if it isn’t happening, what can we do about it?
Humphrey Oh, there’s so much we can do, Prime Minister.
We can impose taxes, we can stiffen European rules about
carbon emissions, rubbish disposal.
We can make massive investments in wind turbines.
We can, in fact, Prime Minister, under your leadership, agree to save the world.
Jim Well, I like that!
But Russia, India, China, Brazil, they’ll never cooperate.
Humphrey They don’t have to. We simply ask them to review their emissions policy.
Jim And will they?
Humphrey Yes. And then they’ll decide not to change it.
So we’ll set up a series of international conferences.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister, you can talk about the future of the planet.
Humphrey You can look statesmanlike.
And it’ll be 50 years before anybody can possibly prove you’re wrong.
And you can explain away anything you said before by saying the computer models were flawed.
Jim The voters will love me!
Humphrey You’ll have more government expenditure.
Jim Yes. How will we pay for it? We’re broke.
Humphrey We impose a special global warming tax on fuel now,
but we phase in the actual expenditure gradually. Say, over 50 years?
That will get us out of the hole for now.
Bernard The Germans will be pleased.
They have a big green movement.
Claire And we can even get the progs on board!
Bernard As long as they get more benefits than everyone else.
Jim My broadcast is on Sunday morning.
Humphrey You have a day to get the conference to agree.
Jim That’s not a problem.
The delegates will be desperate for something to announce
when they get home.
There is one problem.
Nothing will have actually been achieved.
Humphrey It will sound as though it has.
So people will think it has.
That’s all that matters!
(Later following the BBC interview, beginning 27:34)
Bernard Oh, magnificent, Prime Minister!
Humphrey I think you got away with it, Jim,
but the cabinet will have been pretty surprised.
We’ll have to square them fast.
Humphrey We’re not there yet.
After that interview, you’ll need to announce some pretty impressive action.
Jim An initiative.
Claire A working party?
Humphrey Bit lightweight.
Bernard A taskforce?
Humphrey Not sure.
Jim Do we have enough in the kitty?
Claire It could be one of those initiatives that you announce
but never actually spend the money.
Jim Great. Like the one on child poverty.
Bernard Maybe it should be a government committee?
Jim Well what about a Royal Commission?
It won’t report for three years, and if we put the right people
on it, they’ll never agree about anything important.
Jim Right! A Royal Commission!
No, wait a minute, that makes it sound as if we think
it’s important but not urgent.
Claire Well, what about a Global Warming Tsar?
Jim Fine! Would that do it?
Humphrey No, I think it might need a bit more than that, Prime Minister.
It’ll mean announcing quite a big unit, and an impressive salary for that Tsar,
to show how much importance you place upon him.
Jim No problem. Who would it be?
Humphrey Ah, well, it can’t be a political figure.
That would be too divisive.
It has to be somebody impartial.
Jim You mean a judge?
Humphrey No, somebody from the real world.
Somebody who knows how to operate the levers of power,
to engage the gears of the Whitehall machine,
to drive the engine of government.
Jim That’s quite a tall order.
Anybody got any ideas?
Humphrey… Could you?
Humphrey Yes, Prime Minister.
CO2 hysteria is addictive. Here’s what it does to your brain:
Just say No!
via Science Matters
June 5, 2022 at 12:37PM