The real ‘truth’ behind global warming guru Greta
It's getting harder to have an honest discussion, when even the Press Council would rather hear sweet green fables than blunt truths.
Take its latest ruling, defending the freakishly influential goddess of global warming, Greta Thunberg.
Thunberg is just 17. She has no expertise in global warming, grossly catastrophises about a "mass extinction" and proposes "solutions" so extreme that almost nobody could live by them.
Yet this teenager is both a guru and shield - who dares criticise a child? - to adults who have lost their dignity and their senses. They've had her lecture at the United Nations, the European Parliament, climate conferences and the World Economic Forum.
It's medieval. Adults treat this child as some kind of holy fool, loving her all the more for hearing their own words repeated back with an fiery-eyed certainty that only youth - or maybe something else - can give.
What could be that "something else"?
Thunberg's mother explains. In her book, Our House Is On Fire, she says daughter's "superpower" is an "out-of-the box thinking" that comes from her "neuropsychiatric functional impairments".
She lists them: selective mutism, Asperger's, high-functioning autism and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Greta agrees her Asperger's helps her to "think outside the box" with clarity and without needing to "really care about social codes".
Many journalists endorse this myth, but I've told the truth: Thunberg's disorders help to explain her near-mystical air of certainty, but also why she's a false prophet.
It is a symptom of autism and forms of Asperger's to not "really care about social codes" - or not fully understand them. That often means not tolerating compromises with other people or their views.
That, and brushing aside counterarguments - like the fact her solutions would cause more misery than warming itself - is what gives Thunberg that "certainty" adults worship.
To my argument, the Press Council on Thursday says shut up. There is "no public interest" in me "undermining the credibility of a person, her opinions or her supporters on the basis of her disabilities in circumstances where many people share and express similar opinions." (Like Press Council members?)
How foolish. I don't mention her disorders to undermine her arguments but to explain her otherwise inexplicable appeal.
The Press Council has sabotaged honest debate.
I may safely tell a falsehood - that Thunberg's disabilities are "superpowers" - but cannot truthfully say they're not.
Originally published as The real 'truth' behind global warming guru Greta