Nagging New York Times Writer: Stay Home, Not For The Pandemic But For The Planet

Nagging New York Times Writer: Stay Home, Not For The Pandemic But For The Planet

A theory of mine is that liberals and Democrats truly loved the pandemic in large part because they believe lockdowns are the way people were supposed to live — at home dependent on government welfare.

They think it’s better for economic “equality” and, more importantly, better for the planet.

That theory got a nice boost this week from the New York Times. Professional nag Farhad Manjoo wrote Thursday that Americans, stir crazy after having been told to indefinitely lock themselves in at home, should cool it with all of the travel they’re suddenly doing.

“Sure, there’s something magical about meeting face to face, but in an age of pretty good videoconferencing, there isn’t magic enough to justify the extreme environmental costs of routine flight,” nagged Manjoo. “But flying is so carbon intensive — your share of the emissions from a single round-trip trans-Atlantic flight are almost enough to wipe out the gains you might get from living car-free for a year — that it’s worth considering limiting leisure plane trips, too.”

The phrase “it’s worth considering” is liberal speak for, “Do it, moron.”

Right up until March 2020, average Americans were living their best lives, with air travel steadily climbing between January 2018 right up until the government told them to stay home. Air travel reached an all-time high in January 2020.

As of now, the number of commercial flights in the air remains at about half of what it was before Americans were told to stop doing anything resembling fun. The number is climbing though, and that has neurotic nerds with control issues like Manjoo very uncomfortable.

They’d prefer you remain at home, relying on a government check and, ideally, leaving as small a “carbon footprint” as possible. That means no driving, no flying, no boating, no fun.

People like Manjoo think your appetite for seeing family across the country or even just seeing something new in a different place doesn’t “justify” the toll that they say it takes on the planet.

“I’m not one for flight shaming,” wrote Manjoo, “but that level of indulgence ought to earn some measure of social opprobrium.”

Translation: Stay home, dummy.

Manjoo further lectured in his piece about how bad boats are for the environment, going so far as to entertain the thought of the “outright prohibition” of cruise lines.

“Tourism should not return to anything like its old, profligate normal,” he said. “The pandemic has presented the world with an opportunity to reset how we tour this planet, and we should reach for it.”

The collective answer should be, “Screw you, Manjoo.”

But this, as should have been suspected all along, is what liberals want. A reduction in our standard of living. When has that ever not been the case? They don’t want you to eat meat. They don’t want you taking hot showers. And they sure as hell don’t want you flying.

The pandemic simply gave them an excuse to live their fantasy of aggressively controlling everyone for at least a year. They’re trying to make it last longer.

Eddie Scarry is the D.C. columnist at The Federalist and author of "Privileged Victims: How America's Culture Fascists Hijacked the Country and Elevated Its Worst People."
Photo Pexels
Related Posts