Dark Ages
“You fools! You thrice-damned fools!”
This was a quote from a short novel I recently read called Anthem by Ayn Rand. These were the words the protagonist shouted to the World Council of Scholars after an unfortunate epiphany when he learned that the supposedly wisest men of his society were in fact dreary and dogmatic figureheads. Without giving away the story too much (some of you might want to read this book for yourselves after all), the protagonist lives in a highly structured collectivist society. This takes place hundreds or even thousands of years in the future. This collectivist society is quite primitive by today’s standards without running water or electricity. The protagonist ends up defying the laws of his society when he discovers technological relics of the past and he ends up reverse-engineering an incandescent light bulb. Risking his life and freedom, he brings this new wonder to the Council of Scholars in the hope that they would recognize the kind of progress this would represent. However, instead of embracing this technology that would ease the burden of mankind, the Council rejected it due to it not being agreed upon by all members of the council. In fact it took 50 years for the Council to approve the use of candles in place of torches. This was an obvious device in the novel for Ayn Rand to point out the idea that committees, councils, and congresses usually work against the overall progress of mankind. Innovation is strangled by regulation and governing bodies.
The reason I’m writing about Ayn Rand and light bulbs today is because of something I read on one of the news pages on the internet. The president and the congress just signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The title is innocuous enough. However, this law is set to impose fuel efficiency restrictions on automobile manufacturers that will force them to make vehicles smaller, lighter, and much more fragile. Now, I’m all for fuel efficiency. And considering the increasing cost of oil, there is certainly a market for more fuel-efficient cars. But that doesn’t seem to be good enough for the Congress, the President, and every other douchebag in Washington bucking for re-election. Don’t let the free market demand for more fuel efficient cars result in reducing CO2 emissions. Then you worthless figureheads won’t be able to cash in on that during the election. This is just another way for politicians to pander to special interest lobbies at the expense of everyone else.
“But Steve,” you ask “what does this have to do with light bulbs and Ayn Rand?” I’m glad I pretended that you asked that question. In the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is included a regulation that all incandescent light bulbs be replaced with Compact Fluorescent Bulbs (CFL’s) by 2012. Normally, I wouldn’t have a problem with using an alternative light bulb. But I still think there should be a choice. This new law imposes that 100 Watt incandescent bulbs would be illegal in less than five years. I have a real problem with this. This law will not only remove any semblance of free choice in a free market, but it also replaces an inefficient but relatively harmless product, with a slightly more efficient but highly toxic product. CFL’s contain mercury, a highly toxic metal which is a liquid at standard temperature and pressure. These bulbs are not only expensive to buy, but they need to be disposed of as hazardous material. So there is now an additional hidden cost to these already expensive light bulbs. Besides the disposal concerns, what if one of them breaks? They are after all glass tubes and even the most graceful among us has accidentally dropped a light bulb or two during his or her lifetime. With an ordinary bulb all you would need to clean up the mess is a broom and dustpan. If you break a CFL, you would practically have to call in a team of Haz-Mat specialists to properly clean up the mess. Again we have an additional cost and an absurd amount of sacrifice on the altar of environmental hysteria.
“But Steve, what about alleviating the growing problem of Global Warming? We have to do our part.” This is where the parallels to Anthem come into play. We have an energy source available to us that produces no carbon emissions of any kind. It requires no coal, oil, or hydrocarbon gas. It is truly a miraculous energy source. We won’t use it. It’s as simple as that. The EPA will not allow new nuclear reactors to be built. This is due to simple blind fear. We have a technology that will ease the burdens of our nation, reduce CO2 emissions dramatically, and make CFLs completely unnecessary. But we aren’t allowed to use it. To quote the Council of Scholars “And if this should lighten the toil of men, then it is a great evil, for men have no cause to exist save in toiling for other men.” This I think is the real reason why the Priests of the Church of Environmentalism are so opposed to nuclear energy. It would eliminate the need for personal sacrifice and legislation to enforce it. All religions require that the faithful make a sacrifice of some kind. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is tantamount to a Papal edict from the Vatican of political correctness. It will force us all to be good environmentalists whether we like it or not. And if a few of us get mercury poisoning or go broke from using those thrice-damned CFLs, consider that just a cross we have to bear.
First they came for the automobile industry, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t in the automobile industry;
And then they came for Microsoft, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Microsoft share holder;
And then they came for the rich, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t rich;
And then . . . they came for the light bulbs . . . And by that time nobody could even see who the hell they were coming for.
This was a quote from a short novel I recently read called Anthem by Ayn Rand. These were the words the protagonist shouted to the World Council of Scholars after an unfortunate epiphany when he learned that the supposedly wisest men of his society were in fact dreary and dogmatic figureheads. Without giving away the story too much (some of you might want to read this book for yourselves after all), the protagonist lives in a highly structured collectivist society. This takes place hundreds or even thousands of years in the future. This collectivist society is quite primitive by today’s standards without running water or electricity. The protagonist ends up defying the laws of his society when he discovers technological relics of the past and he ends up reverse-engineering an incandescent light bulb. Risking his life and freedom, he brings this new wonder to the Council of Scholars in the hope that they would recognize the kind of progress this would represent. However, instead of embracing this technology that would ease the burden of mankind, the Council rejected it due to it not being agreed upon by all members of the council. In fact it took 50 years for the Council to approve the use of candles in place of torches. This was an obvious device in the novel for Ayn Rand to point out the idea that committees, councils, and congresses usually work against the overall progress of mankind. Innovation is strangled by regulation and governing bodies.
The reason I’m writing about Ayn Rand and light bulbs today is because of something I read on one of the news pages on the internet. The president and the congress just signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The title is innocuous enough. However, this law is set to impose fuel efficiency restrictions on automobile manufacturers that will force them to make vehicles smaller, lighter, and much more fragile. Now, I’m all for fuel efficiency. And considering the increasing cost of oil, there is certainly a market for more fuel-efficient cars. But that doesn’t seem to be good enough for the Congress, the President, and every other douchebag in Washington bucking for re-election. Don’t let the free market demand for more fuel efficient cars result in reducing CO2 emissions. Then you worthless figureheads won’t be able to cash in on that during the election. This is just another way for politicians to pander to special interest lobbies at the expense of everyone else.
“But Steve,” you ask “what does this have to do with light bulbs and Ayn Rand?” I’m glad I pretended that you asked that question. In the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is included a regulation that all incandescent light bulbs be replaced with Compact Fluorescent Bulbs (CFL’s) by 2012. Normally, I wouldn’t have a problem with using an alternative light bulb. But I still think there should be a choice. This new law imposes that 100 Watt incandescent bulbs would be illegal in less than five years. I have a real problem with this. This law will not only remove any semblance of free choice in a free market, but it also replaces an inefficient but relatively harmless product, with a slightly more efficient but highly toxic product. CFL’s contain mercury, a highly toxic metal which is a liquid at standard temperature and pressure. These bulbs are not only expensive to buy, but they need to be disposed of as hazardous material. So there is now an additional hidden cost to these already expensive light bulbs. Besides the disposal concerns, what if one of them breaks? They are after all glass tubes and even the most graceful among us has accidentally dropped a light bulb or two during his or her lifetime. With an ordinary bulb all you would need to clean up the mess is a broom and dustpan. If you break a CFL, you would practically have to call in a team of Haz-Mat specialists to properly clean up the mess. Again we have an additional cost and an absurd amount of sacrifice on the altar of environmental hysteria.
“But Steve, what about alleviating the growing problem of Global Warming? We have to do our part.” This is where the parallels to Anthem come into play. We have an energy source available to us that produces no carbon emissions of any kind. It requires no coal, oil, or hydrocarbon gas. It is truly a miraculous energy source. We won’t use it. It’s as simple as that. The EPA will not allow new nuclear reactors to be built. This is due to simple blind fear. We have a technology that will ease the burdens of our nation, reduce CO2 emissions dramatically, and make CFLs completely unnecessary. But we aren’t allowed to use it. To quote the Council of Scholars “And if this should lighten the toil of men, then it is a great evil, for men have no cause to exist save in toiling for other men.” This I think is the real reason why the Priests of the Church of Environmentalism are so opposed to nuclear energy. It would eliminate the need for personal sacrifice and legislation to enforce it. All religions require that the faithful make a sacrifice of some kind. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is tantamount to a Papal edict from the Vatican of political correctness. It will force us all to be good environmentalists whether we like it or not. And if a few of us get mercury poisoning or go broke from using those thrice-damned CFLs, consider that just a cross we have to bear.
First they came for the automobile industry, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t in the automobile industry;
And then they came for Microsoft, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Microsoft share holder;
And then they came for the rich, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t rich;
And then . . . they came for the light bulbs . . . And by that time nobody could even see who the hell they were coming for.