23 March 2007

Al Gore and the Moore principle - riding the wave

The whole story circulates too widely to comment on it, after all everyone and his mother in law already spent a few sleepless night waiting for the wall of seawater swallowing his dwelling. And everyone has already discussed with his mother in law the derision of some people (especially of Republican persuasion in US of A) about this famous water wall.

But it seems that, after getting that Oscar, Al Gore is not content with his cinematic achievements, trying to use the momentum for political advancement.

Even though he has stated he does not intend to run again, polls suggest Mr Gore would be one of the favoured candidates among Democrats, challenging the popularity of Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
The first part of this quote is a consolation, the second a warning: it may happen. And the big question is whether the public will hand the job to the person who... how to say it mildly... reinvents more than just himself.

It has become rather an accepted practice in some "progressive" circles to counter the lies of the other side by even bigger lies and exaggerations, all "for the cause" (let's call it The Moore Principle). When some leftist journalists say that the truth does not matter anymore, when some documentary makers produce fairy tales, it seems only logical that a person with presidential aspirations and similar political leanings will pick up and use the same method. Look what some sober people are saying about Al Gore and his ride on the wave.
Some of Mr. Gore’s centrist detractors point to a report last month by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that studies global warming. The panel went further than ever before in saying that humans were the main cause of the globe’s warming since 1950, part of Mr. Gore’s message that few scientists dispute. But it also portrayed climate change as a slow-motion process.

It estimated that the world’s seas in this century would rise a maximum of 23 inches — down from earlier estimates. Mr. Gore, citing no particular time frame, envisions rises of up to 20 feet and depicts parts of New York, Florida and other heavily populated areas as sinking beneath the waves, implying, at least visually, that inundation is imminent.
I am not too good in non-metric units of measure, but I guess that a difference between 23 inches and 20 feet is a bit more than a centimetre or two. I would also guess that fear, even when not coupled with greed, is a very good brain stimulator and makes crowds much more receptive to the message and the messenger. And the messenger is right here, looming larger than life, waving his Oscar (what symbol stronger than this one was invented in US?) and, while not explicitly promising salvation, at least broadly hinting that he (of course) is the savior. The Moore principle at its finest.

As Terry Glavin says:
Climate change alarmism is every bit as corrosive to public debates and public policy as climate change denial. Inattention to the truth, inconvenient or otherwise, is no better than propaganda.
But Al Gore seems to be undisturbed by the people who, belonging to his camp, are worried about the price of "inattention to truth" (That's Terry Glavin, being more British than a Brit in this case - as far as understatement is concerned). This is the answer Gore offers his critics:
I am trying to communicate the essence of it in the lay language that I understand.
So - maybe there is an opportunity here for the man? Like, for example, to improve his understanding and to start with purchasing a measuring tape to get an inkling of the difference between an inch and a foot.

And as for the title of the above linked article: " Reinvented Gore returns to Capitol Hill": reinvention seems to be a strong feature of Gore, after all he has already (re)invented the Internet...

Cross-posted on Yourish.com