H/T MikeF, in 2012, as climate change scaremongering failed to move public opinion, the Climate Change industry called for help from the Tobacco Control industry, and Stanton Glantz and Robert Proctor flew into La Jolla to help.
It’s no surprise that these two groups should have met up and swapped ideas: they’re both in the business of scaremongering about trace amounts of chemical compounds in the atmosphere. The difference is that the Tobacco Control industry has been very successful in its scaremongering, while the Climate Change industry has not.
Why hasn’t the Climate Change industry been as successful as the Tobacco Control industry? One simple reason may be that they’ve only been scaremongering for two or three decades, while the tobacco control industry have 70 years experience (90 years, if the Nazi era is included) under their belt. But another explanation may be that in the internet era there no longer exists a mass media monopoly on what is the accepted truth. There are instead multiple conflicting sources of information, and it is has become much more difficult to condition/brainwash a population than once it was.
Anyway, the result of their conference was a report on their deliberations.
we currently lack a compelling public narrative about climate change in the United States.
And that’s what this was all about: how to get people to believe in anthropogenic global warming.
Richard Ayres, an experienced environmental attorney, suggested that the RICO Act, which had been used effectively against the tobacco industry, could similarly be used to bring a lawsuit against carbon producers.
They saw the fossil fuel industries as practising disinformation:
Both the tobacco industry and the fossil fuel industry have adopted a strategy of disseminating disinformation to manufacture uncertainty and forestall government action, and in so doing, have placed corporate interests above the public interest.
But what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and the Climate Change industry could equally be said to have adopted an opposite strategy of disseminating disinformation to manufacture certainty and promote government action.
The RICO act is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and allows the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them in doing. Wikipedia’s definition of a racket:
A racket is a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not actually exist, that will not be put into effect, or that would not otherwise exist if the racket did not exist. Conducting a racket is racketeering.
But isn’t the Global Warming scare ‘a problem that does not actually exist’? And isn’t the tobacco scare another ‘problem that does not actually exist’?
It seems to me that it’s the Climate Change and Tobacco Control industries that are prime candidates for having charges brought against them under the RICO act.