They could. They did. They do. But acknowledging the problem would require fixing it. And fixing the problem would require a lot of important people admitting they were very wrong about a great many thing.

These people see the iceberg approaching after staking their reputation on icebergs being a thing of the past. Now they’re just hoping the iceberg is far enough away so they’ll be dead before it hits.

Mike

It’s not that they’re just idiots. It’s that someone who should have been the shop steward at a factory in their hometown winds up writing articles for some DC thinktank. Or someone like Krugman, who should have stayed someone only other economists recognized, being elevated to a political pundit.

Mike

If I could see it coming why couldn’t the European bureaucracy?

So I don’t think Paul Krugman, say, or Angela Merkel is stupid. They are just acting as if what they want to believe to be true actually is true, and their minds are working hard to maintain their belief system and the conclusions they’ve already reached. I would also agree that liberals and progressives tend to believe what sounds good, rather than investigate what actually works. That’s especially true nowadays.

I then ask them, why was that? Was it because factories were belching smoke into the atmosphere? Was it because ancient humans were driving around in SUVs? I then have to tell them that the earth is going to do what it wants to do regarding temperature and “climate change,” and that humans don’t have a thing to do with it. The sun, for example, can vary the amount of energy it radiates.

I also tell them I am old enough to remember when Mt. St. Helens erupted in the Pacific northwest. That volcanic spewed enough volcanic ash into the air so that it cut down how much radiant energy from the sun reached the earth, and we had cool summers for the next couple of years after that event. I also remember how the “scientists” in the 1970s were predicting doom from the next coming “ice age” that was just around the corner!

(Not sure if that’s one of the seven deadlies, but maybe it ought to be…. OTOH, it may well be a natural characteristic, one that has to be “unlearned”. But how does one “unlearn” arrogance….? “There but for the grace go I”? Across-the-board—as opposed to “selective”—empathy? Experience? One certainly has to know when one is being exposed—and influenced by—propaganda…and so read “1984” every so often? Count to ten—like anger—before making decisions? Read more books?…On the third hand, arrogance DOES have its uses…in some areas, at some times…)

OBloodyHell:

Your assertion is not mine. You don’t get reword what I say, then claim victory.

Perhaps my case is not common, but it does exist. I once argued to some length with a conservative, quite intelligent in my estimation, who claimed that liberal types were truly not intelligent on account of their liberal positions. That settled it as far as he was concerned.

I think a more common criticism of liberals is that they dismiss sources on the right (usually without reading them, and by labeling them “racist” or something equally pejorative) and uncritically believe sources on the left.