This past Thursday Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC)’s Office released House Resolution 109 “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal”. According to the Resolution’s preamble many, if not all, contemporary socio-economic problems (insufficient provision of basic needs, wage stagnation, racial injustice, and a threat to national security, etc.) are caused or intensified by climate change. While legitimate arguments could be made debunking global warming’s connection to the elucidated socio-economic problems, I would like to comment on the underlying economic worldview that undergirds H Res109’s proposals. The Resolution dictates government control of our economy to fight the climate change war.

The authors of the Resolution believe that it was “Federal Government-led mobilization during World War II and the New Deal [that] created the greatest middle-class United States have ever seen …”, but many US citizens “were excluded”. H Res 109 sees great opportunity in “a new national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal era….” AOC and crew believe the economy must be mobilized for the climate change war creating “millions of good, high wage jobs” leading to “unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of United States” and to boot the changes will “counteract systemic injustices…”.

According to H Res 109 it is the duty of the federal government “to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition… create millions of good, high-wage jobs and ensure prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States … to invest in infrastructure… to secure a sustainable environment…” and in general protect the downtrodden. The goals of the Resolution “should be accomplished through a 10-year national mobilization” – I guess the five year plans that the Soviet Union used were only one-half good enough.

The 10-year plan makes the federal government responsible for protecting against “climate change-related disasters”. All infrastructure improvements and changes must address climate change. The federal government will be responsible for “meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources…”. We will be guaranteed “affordable access to electricity”. The federal government will be in charge of “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability[!]” What a wonderful time to be in the building trades! The federal government will ensure “massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse emissions from manufacturing industry as much as it’s technologically feasible”. It’s a shame that we have to let technological feasibility get in the way when we are fighting the climate change war. The federal government will be “working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector …”. We must rein in the cows! “[T]ransportation systems in the United States” will be “overhaul[ed]” “to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions … as much as is technologically feasible…”. Again, (and, throughout the document) that pesky technological feasibility rears its ugly head. Some of the additional responsibilities for our federal government are “providing resources, training, and high-quality education, including higher education, to all people of the United States, with a focus on frontline and vulnerable communities”, “guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States” and appropriately the final three words of resolution are “access to nature.”

Economies can work very efficiently during wartime. If you have the Germans approaching from the east and fear of the Japanese attacking from the west, a centralized directed private economy (of course this is economic fascism) can be efficient. However, when the enemy is as ethereal as changing weather patterns, it will be more difficult to marshal the troops. All AOC and company’s proposals will do is rob United States citizens of economic freedom and shuttle us down the road to serfdom.

Is economic fascism acceptable when the only enemy is a bunch of hot air?