Definitions first. PEOPLE follow STORIES. (Examples: The Gospel, the story of Exodus/Moses, Communism, Warmunism, the Story of Elon Musk,…)
GROUPS of people who follow the same story form a MOVEMENT.
Is this irrational?
No. To find followers, a story must be plausible enough to be potentially true. Some stories are mostly true (but always simplifications).
The rational reason to follow a story
You pick stories to follow to simplify your personal decision-making. You simply do not have the time to figure everything out for yourself. And if you did – for SOME aspect of reality – you would become an important storyteller with a growing followership yourself.
So don’t be ashamed to follow a story. Just make sure you re-examine the truthfulness of the story from time to time. You will make slightly sub-optimal decisions quickly instead of spending all your time trying to figure out optimal decisions. Which is most of the time a good tradeoff.
How it all goes wrong
When the obvious con man Al Gore came out with his “An Inconvenient Truth” in 2007, warmunist fanboys should have taken pause to ask themselves, wait, ain’t this a bit fishy? Why does a guy who talks like a used car salesman become the acclaimed apostle of my story? Something must be wrong here. (It is. The climate models have more than a hundred parameters to model processes that are not completely understood . So they’re just an exercise in curve-fitting, and they were fitted to the rising temperatures observed from the end of the 1970ies on. Government scientists were sure they had it all figured out: They were their own biggest followers.)
And don’t even mention the porn author and railway engineer Rajendra K. Pachauri, the ex head of the UNIPCC. Well actually I don’t hold the porn against him. No wait, actually I do – it wasn’t any good. (girl falls in love with railway engineer, after having great sex with him. Snoooze.)
How movements collapse
What happens when a story reaches the end of its lifetime – like warmunism and Globalism do at the moment? Do we get a “Sorry, we were wrong!”? No, not from the narrators of the story who will drive their movement as long as they possibly can.
What happens is that the small followers vanish one by one, depending on how fast each one of them reaches his pain threshold as the story he took as a guide through his life reveals itself more and more to be a falsehood.
He will fall silent, re-orient himself, pick a different story and maybe become a vocal proponent of that story, and stay silent about his earlier, now proven to be wrong, belief, and hope nobody finds out.
But, understand that there is no shame in being wrong. And, switching the story is what we all do when we understand that we are wrong.
So a movement driven by a story stops being relevant once enough followers have evaporated. It might continue to exist as a fringe cult forever.
How do I know Warumunism is already a collapsed fringe movement?
Simple. I’ve been looking into the warmunist power grab since 2007. One of my habits is to look at the google news frontpage at least once a day. Back then there was not a day without a new terrible problem Global Warming would cause. Like, I don’t know, more avalanches, or raindeer extinction. Imagine something, they had it.
It was the moral panic of the day. Today, it rarely reaches the threshold to acquire headline status. So that’s how we know it’s gone. When even the fanatic journalists can’t lift it to attention, it’s gone. Journalists were always the biggest followers because they loved the prospect of regulating industry out of existence: They hate the West, as we all know.
I’m oversimplifying; a few journalists are honest people. Those usually get fired though.
And, as mentioned: Do you hear ANY warmunist proclaim, I’m sorry, I was wrong? There is just one: James Lovelock, once one of the biggest narrators of the warmunist armageddon, has publically recanted. Kudos to him. All the others, they eventually just vanish from the warmunist movement as they flip to another story.
Regrettable, because I like when someone has the balls to admit he was wrong, but not extraordinary; and not immoral in itself.
Switching stories is what we do.