>> "true gentleman," great read and well-written and please join me in thinking john hechinger. >> thank you all for coming out. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> book tv is on twitter and facebook. we want to hear from you.

>> good afternoon. welcome to the heritage foundation, and our auditorium. we welcome those who join us on our heritage.org web site on all of these occasions, our guests here inhouse we ask that last curtsy to check our mobile devices have been silenced or turned off, and of course for those watching online, you're welcome to send questions or comments at any time, simply e-mail speaker@heritage.org. hosting our guest today is becky norton dunlap the ronald reagan distinguished fellow here at heritage. that's conservative movement leader, she serves arizona chairman of the conservative action project and also advocates for heritage's american conservation ethic and advances energy and natural resources policy in general. she previously served as heritage's vice president for external relations and most recently led our "restore

america" project. before joining heritage she served as secretary of natural resources for commonwealth of virginia and the cabinet of then-governor george allen and also serve reelrolls in the reagan administration, special assistant to the president and director of his cabinet office as well as senior special assistant to attorney general ed meese and was undersecretary of the depth as well as assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks. please join me in welcoming my colleague and friend, becky norton-dunlop. [applause] >> thank you, john, and let me add my words of welcome to you. we love having people come to the heritage foundation, either personally or online or on television. so welcome, welcome, welcome. well, you know, the hair take foundation has promoted the american conservation ethic, we call it land of liberty,

stewartship of america's environment. and the number one principle that we outline is people are our most important unique and precious resource. and our number eight principle is that the most successful environmental policies flow from liberty. people and liberty. so, when i read the opening sentence of chapter one of the book i got from encounter books, i read this sentence. this book is about freedom. and i was hooked. i knew i had to read the rest of this book. well, the author of this book is with us today, and he has got actually a final copy of his book, "green temperature --"

green tyranny "and the author is rupert darwall. he has been in business, finance, an investment banker, been in public policy arena, he's been in government. he's seen this issue from a lot of various angles, and he studied at cambridge where he studied economics and history. a great foundation for writing this very, very fine book. let me just tell you what a couple of our noted friends have said about this new book "green tyranny." michael barone a friend to all of us here at heritage, and well-known across our country, said: rupe bert darwall has written a definitive and clear-eyed history of global warming alarmism. its success at enlisting western elites in its cause.

wow. very, very, very important. judge said: rupert darwall has told the story of frauds and fools thoroughly and well. his truth may be inconvenient to some. and finally, let me say that charles moore, from "the daily telegraph" wrote: rupert darwall is a wonderfully lucid historian of intellectual and political movement, which is just the job to explain what has been inflicted upon us over the past 30 years or so in the name of saving the planet. many very fine people who have read this book are recommending it to all of us. and we are very fortunate here at the heritage foundation to

have the author to come and talk to us a little bit about his book, what prompted him to write it, and take your questions. so, welcome to the heritage foundation, rupert darwall. [applause] thank you for your kind words. was in washington a year ago and it's extraordinary how much has changed since then. nowhere has the change been more profound, more con queen shall and more necessary than in climate and energy policy. the united states is going to withdraw from the paris agreement. the climate fleet in all but name that president obama didn't have the guts to send to the senate for advice and consent. no one should underestimate the historic importance of president trump's decision. this is the third time, no less, that a republican president has ejected targets and timetables

for emissions cuts. the first bush, president push in the original u.n. framework convention on climate change, and the second bush which is repudiation of the quioto protocol. it is devastating for the u.n. climate process. the architecture of the paris agreement was been designed to subvert the requirement for advise and consent and frees fre united states to at the be third -- enemied strat prewitt to role back the clean power plan. all of this is happening because of what happened on inform 8, 2016 -- november 8, 2016 and wouldn't have happened but for the trim work untaken by the think tanks in this city and' in chicago and austin, texas. they took on the climate industrial complex. they showed why it needed to be

and unwhat needed to be done. america owes a huge debt of gratitude to the scholars and think arers of heritage who have been at the forefront of this great effort. i'd like to record my thanks to the experts at heritage who helped me with "green tyranny." kathleen, president trump's nominee to lead the council on environmental quality, and steven groves, now working in washington. this is something bigger than energy policy. it's bigger than economics. the mining jobs, new jobs being created by the oil and gas sector from the shale revolution and bigger than all the manufacturing jobs being reshored thanks to america's energy super abundance. this is more fundamental. ultimately this is a battle between the administrative state

and america's constitutional order. it's about how america is governed. in a word it's about freedom. a return to this at the end of my remarks. first i'd like to tell you how we got here and the aim of global warming is the age of wind and solar. global warming wasn't meant to be like this. the original idea was that nuclear power would be the solution. politics have global warming began two sweden much earlier than most people spouse. politicians over here first started talking about role in warming in the late 1980s. it was in june 1988 that nasa scientists and climate alarmist james hansen gave his testimony to the senate energy and natural resources committee. yet sweden had already been obsessing about global warming for a decade and a half. in 1974, when al gore was still at law school, the sweepishing prime minister was saying the climate change would be the

biggest issue at the end of the 20th century. sweden. the country that process receive left wants america to be. its way fair state. , social engineering, foreign policy based on moral preening. the longest period of one party rule in any western democracy. a social democratic party claiming direct lineal dissent. a policy bernie sanders wants the democrats to be. there's a lot of sweden in "green tyranny" for good reason. a book written on sweden call in the new to at that toto tall ta they were pioneering a soft totalitarianism. only two centers before napoleon, sweden developed a centralized administrative apparatus, when the social democrats formed this first government in 1921, it gave them a political system, huntford

says, documented to the swift en -- the legislature is weak, the executive strong, and for centuries real power has laid in the government administrative machine. does that sound at all familiar? sounds to me very much like what obama's state wanted to become. the perfect instrument to carry out the 20th century's most prolonged and thorough experiment in social engineering outside the soviet union and communist china. it pioneered a cradle to grave welfare state to abolish -- replace the family and abolish the patriarch can i and plated a eugenics program. a student protest swept the west in the late 1960s and 1970s thatad anti-americanism as a safety valve and aligned sweden with the viet cong, the fidel

castro. shredden had a policy of neutrality since the napoleonic wars but how many know in the cold war sweden had a secret military alliance with washington and palmer's job after returning from study was in the pro cia wing of swedish intelligence service. in the late 1960s, sweden launched a war on coal, first with acid rain scare and then global warming. it would be naive to taking this at face value, and think that olaf palmer was motivate bid genuine concern about global warming. deep deception came easily to this immensely talented and sophisticated politician. in the newspaper interview where he first talked about global warming, palmer explained that a vision of utopia, has the same function as a mirage in the desert. without me mirage you wouldn't

get to the next over assist. global warm -- oasis. global warming was the mirage and what was the oasis? they were bat to embark on a civil nuclear power program but nuclear power wasn't popular with many ordinary swedish voter sod the social democrats decided day had to frighten swede by claiming the alternative to nuclear was far worse. sweden does not have any coal so they played the coal card by hyping up acid rain. i you don't have nuclear, sweden's forests will dry and lakes will fill up with acid. after acid rain came global warming. the scientists played a leading role in both. he wrote the first government report anywhere in the world on acid rain. his report has a familiar ring. replace the words acid rain with climate change and reads like the prototype of an ipcc

assessment report. more than any single individual he can claim credit for the intergovernmental panel on climate change and swedele more than any other country brought the ipcc into being. as you'll find in the pages of my book, global warming was politicized right from the start and make no mistake, global warming was first deployed for political reasons. yes, sweden succeeded in putting acid rain and then global warming on the international agenda but it completely failed when it came to nuclear power. given that sweden started the global warming scare to get nuclear power, how did we end up with wind and solar? my first book i touched on the environmentalism during the darkest chapter of europe's history. happened to be a historical fact that the nazi were the first political party in the world to champion wind power, which they did in the 1933 election. just weeks after invading the

soviet union, hitler was telling his companion that wind power was the future. i suppose you might say in that regard he got something right. but for the three decade after the second world war, west germany was a model western democracy. as one ecosocialist complains the german social debt crated replaced the class struggle with the american way of life. that began to change in the 1970s. no other country had such a high proportion of far left students as west germany. a survey in 1969 found that 30% of wetter e west german high school and university students claimed to sympathize we marxism or communism. in the 1950s, the frankfurt school of marxist. [unintelligible] electric to alls return from the united states to frank toward. there will student protests against the vietnam war in june 1967 the student demonstrator was shot and killed in west berlin. the shot that put conservative

west germany on course to evolve into the progressive country it is today then, "new york times" declared four decades later. in fact, the west berlin policeman who fired the shot was stars si agent. what happen plane has high jacked. the imprisoned ringleaders of a gang committed suicide. ordinary germans were appalled at the violence. the extreme left found itself washed up on the margins of west german society. they soon found a way back. like the swedish social democrats the german sdp wanted to build a spring of nuclear brother stations bull -- huge spontaneous demonstrations

against nuclear power. the washed up student radicals saw their chance. the green party was formed in 1980. the new left, the student radicals by their aging middle age radicals hasn't at the leadership of the new party and absorbing the oecologial guard of ex-nazis and neo-nazis and other fast right nationalists. to do this they aging student radicals of the new left didn't have to perform a so many are assault somersault. they addressed the past into the ecological garb we see today. in stain of the marx jim cat struggle vision of capitallity. instead of the cult of the factory, the cult of the forest, instead of the color red, the color green. it was written by paul perman, a little new york intellectual in

a brilliant essay published in the new republic in 2001. berman writes writes writes of n student radicals being moated by anti-naziism. looking for nats sits under every bed and cupboard. they saw the state of israel as a crypto nazi state. as berman says, quote, to have set out to fight nazis in its sundry modern democracy guys, only to have ended up in a modern left-whining guise, nazi, like. green tyranny takes bermans analysis further. they ended up embracing the nazis green ideology, red and green makes brown. and here we come to an unpleasant truth, one that can't be -- the people who were on the wrong side of the cold war came

out on top in the post cold war era. the greens helped turn the kremlin-backed peace movement into a mass movement to try to prevent the atlantic alliance from countering the threat posed by soviet nuclear missiles as france's president put it, pacifism is in the west, the missile inside the east. they're posed -- they're equal not to east out west but loyal to ourselves and argued for what they called nonviolent social defense of the sort norwegians used against the nazi occupation in the second world war and the connections czechs had done. abject total premeditated surrender. to say the peace movement was a gift to the kremlin would be understating the matter. it was heavily penetrate by

eastern bloc intelligence. the mule commonnize party stamped out everything. if the greens hod got their way the european half of the atlantic alliance would have become detacheds are it would have lost the protection of the american nuclear umbrella. in short the west would have lost the cold war. the german greens being on the wrong side of the cold war were -- by 1997 there were nine red green coalitions at state level in germany and in 1998, the first red-green coalition was being formed in berlin two years laterrer. >> an par immigrant galsed the renewable energy act. it put germany on the past to insanity. the law had not been included in any party manifesto or election campaign, the ms voting around didn't know what was in the

bill. germany ended up with more solar capacity than any other country net world and unleashed a solar manufacturing boom in china. where germany led, the rest of europe followed. german insistence, european leaders agreed the renewable energy directive, thereby extending germany's renewable energy policies to rest of europe. this green of europe was the price the west paid for withinning the cold war. energy transformation is the word germans used in their road to the energy ruin. or energy deformation. the forced uptake of renewable energy technologies this opposite of the creative destruction described by us a strand economist in what he called the essential fact about capitalism. rather than panel of destructive destruction at the hands of the

state whose regulations of one current or another. devote quite a few pages to analyzing the destructive economics of renewable energy and pull apart the desings used by the obama administration to justify the green power plan. i'd like to make a direct point. when you put green ideology and environmentalists in charge of energy policy, the outcome is certain. it will be a car crash. in 2004, the korean energy minister said would would cost germans the equivalent of a scoop of ice cream on their monthly energy bills. nine years later the christian democrats said the costs could amount to one trillion euros. $1.2 trillion. that's some ice cream. systemic deceit is not a bug. it's feature of the propaganda but out by climate industrial complex. in the book i quote a revealing speech made in 1986 bay top

german civil servant. disarmingly candid about the use of what he called empty phrases to push forth the environmental agenda. ecology -- another what's claim that ecology and the economy were not in conflict. i myself have made this claim, knowing it to be less than truthful. just remember that whenever you come across claims about green growth or clean energy job bonanzas. as a total contrast to this deceit, i'd like to mention the book's co-dedicateee. fred singler, a seeker of scientific understanding and a great communicator of it. le fred was on a panel of scientist cop seed by the reagan white house that reviewed the signs of acid rain. that also had a leading role in

unmasking the science of the nuclear winter. another example of where the people who had been on the wrong side of the cold war emerged at victor inside in the post cold war era. with the exception of two individuals, all the prominent scientists to signed up to the soviet inspired nuclear winter scare became supporters of the global warming consensus. now people who are now deferred to by governments around the world. i'd like to quote what to me is a priceless exchange involving fred. on february 24, 1994, a answers nightline gave air time to allegory his allegations who was funding climate skeptics. before reminding viewer the cosmologist carl sagan predicted massive environmental damage from the alleged climb mate county is effects of the first war. fred predicted if there were in smoke it would clear quickly, as

ted koppel told viewers the record shows in this instance, -- sagan was wrong and dr. singer was right. before going on to accuse al gore of, quote, resorting to political means to achieve what should ultimately be resolved on a purely scientific basis. which brings know what the historian peter gay wrote recently, what he calls the science of freedom. the most important science for us that there is. the enlighted despots of the 18th century believed they new bert than the people they governed, how to be governed. he wrote the ruler must have had his disposal a perfectly obeaden bureaucracy, all the knowledge possible to gather and unlimited authority to translate his programs into law. die need to say that his is what the climate industrial complex demand of the united states? a form of government americans rejected in 1776 in favor of the

true declaration of independence. america's uniqueness lies not in the fact of its independence but that it became independent to create something without a precedent, government dedicated to the principle of liberty. the demands of the climate industrial complex and the preservation of linter are incompatable. the science is settled, we're told. the government must act. but global warming demand more. it demands that systems agreeing and those who don't to hold their tongue and that dissent be silenced. thus global warming harbors a strong impulse toward the governing mode of the absolutist and the political culture of the totalitarian. at stake, then, is what makes america unique. ultimately global warming is a battle for america's soul, and that is why we're here today, to fight it. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you so very much. we want to have plenty of time for questions sock if you have a question, please raise your hand: wait for the microphone to arrive and then ask the question. >> who has the first question? very good i'm going first. we'll go with the audience. >> when the soviet union fell -- could you introduce yourself. >> i'm mike, i'm an investor and over the hill retired physicist interested in climate change, global warming and all that kind of stuff. when soviet union fell, they listed lots of confessionals. you made a good case that this was -- that soviet union and the

international communist conspiracy, shall we say, had a role in this but it was absent in the -- all of the bad things they admitted doing to us in the papers that were released at that point. is there any documentation that our turncoat spies that said they were global warming and some of these other things that are in your book were left wing conspiracies? i accept their left wing conspiracy but like we're talking about, about the election, was there direct collusion? ...

it could mean they would have to do something but it was all about incriminating people on the west but the soviets were on the right side. in the winter the evidence is very clear, a defector said this was kgb proudest achievement which was the winter scare there was a conference in washington to play out this threat, they basically put, it was really to undermine the reagan administration and the nuclear arms buildup. as i say, if they got their way, the outcome of the cold war would have been very

different. >> okay. yes, right here in the back and them will go too. >> paul larkin, heritage foundation. i've read a few newspaper accounts that surmise that the russians were part involved currently in efforts to fund opposition to fracking for the same sort of long-term purpose that you described. is there evidence that that is actually going on? >> i think it's certainly the case that the russians have a huge interest in preventing fracking which has done immense damage to their economy in terms of the collapse in natural gas prices and turning america into an exporter but i don't review the evidence of that in this, but i do highlight highly the

oligarchs of silicon valley, people like eric schmidt of google have funded anti- fracking campaigns and thereby essentially waging war on the economy, the heartland of america, the middle of america depends upon it and thrives on. if you like, you've got an economic civil war within america capitalism with the two case win against the middle. >> okay, the gentleman and back. >> you can introduce yourself. >> okay. i haven't read your book. >> could you introduce yourself please. your name. >> your citizen. >> i don't want to to to much personal. i haven't read your book, but

what you said over here, somebody needs to teach something or related together, issues to reject. [inaudible] the question is is global warming happening or not? if it is not happening or happening doesn't have anything to do with whether it was done by german, green or soviet union or the war movement or anything like that but my question is is global warming actually happening or

not. >> okay, thank you very much. >> as it happens, i've got a paper that's being produced, being published today by a camp that looks at the signs and what scientists themselves say about the certainties or rather the lack of certainty regarding climate science and the global running hypothesis. but the key thing, i think in the book, i think it is important. why this issue was put on the agenda is an important thing to understand but the prototype of the global warming scare, in my view is acid rain and there is very, very clear that the science turned out to be wrong. if the national academies of science is here and in canada, sweden and britain, they have said acid rain is no certain

than it is on global warming. they turned out to be wrong. when the truth emerged, what was interesting was that the epa was just pushing through the clean air act amendments in congress and they suppressed that findin finding. they demonized in black in the name of the scientist who was the principal scientist involved in discovering that the consensus science on the acid rain was completely wrong , and to this day, none of those academies have retracted or admitted they got the science wrong. so, i would put a big? over the credibility of these organizations when they say the science is settled because there's a previous analog where they said that and they got it wrong. >> would you not also say that one of the issues we are dealing with here is the fear mongering that's going on, in other words, to this gentleman's question, we started off with a global

warming crisis and then it became global warming and then it became climate change. in other words, they seem to be admitting themselves that we don't have a crisis. whatever the change in weather is, and don't you think that fear mongering is a tactic that they are using to try to affect the government policies. >> yes, not only do i think that, i demonstrate in the book that was absolutely embedded right from the word go so there were two conferences as the ipc was being formed in austria and italy, and was clear from the documents is that to get governments to change policy, they had to reverse engineer a catastrophe because they said unless the discount rates, meaning the discount rates traditional discount rates are so low that you can actually

show that there's that much damage occurring from climate change, therefore you have to assume that there is going to be a great big catastrophe down the road and that enables you to justify the policies they wanted. it's absolutely the case. you can read from the document summarizing the book, they reversed engineered a catastrophe to get the policy response they wanted. you're absolutely right. >> okay, any other questions. >> let me then say, as we bring this to a close, we have copies of this book available for you. green tierney, exposing the totalitarian routes of the climate industrial complex. one of the things i think is important for us to keep in mind in the united states of america is, we want to encourage people to seek the truth. that is what we are all about. i might say one of the most oppressive things to me, in addition to just the content of the book is that when you get to page 267, there are

notes, footnotes that reference other research material and that goes on to page 314. in other words, if you want to seek truth, the first thing you should do is get a copy of this book. then read it. then go to the footnotes and get those materials and read them. in other words, don't be suckered by fear monitoring, scare tactics and politicians. get his book green tierney and seek truth. that's all thank them for being here today. thank you so very much. thank you all very much. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> you are watching booktv on c-span2. top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. tv, television for serious readers. >> next, three days of nonfiction books and authors on this new year's weekend. on "after words", christopher scalia, son of the late supreme court justice shares some of his father's beaches of the law, state and virtue. he is interviewed by supreme court corresponded david savage. also on this holiday weekend, historian robert examines the political life of franklin d roosevelt.