If the idea of a human-led monarchy didn’t have its flaws, there wouldn’t have been much call for todays constitutional governments. For example, if an absolute monarch was completely out of touch with reality, there would be little expectation of a prosperous society.

So, when royalty such as Prince Harry suggests that the novel coronavirus is a punishment from a nature deity, that really makes one grateful for the Magna Carta, and its enduring legacy.

That’s just what happened; Prince Harry suggested that COVID-19 was Mother Nature’s way of punishing people for being so mean to the environment.

That’s really interesting, because I had the idea that the virus originated in China, either from a filthy wet-market, or from incompetence in a bio-research lab, and the Chinese Communist Party isn’t being open about it because they’re famously unreliable when it comes to anything that can make them look bad (also, they don’t understand how to run a society, which makes the CCP like every communist ever).

Harry then went on to make the case that people should do more to benefit the environment, complete with inane analogies and obtuse non-sequitors. Among these was comparing people to raindrops.

I don’t know, and I don’t care to try to interpret just what he was attempting to say. What I do know is that Prince Harry has a political ideology that goes after ordinary members of the population to recycle every last plastic bottle, in spite of the fact that households produce only about 1% of recyclable waste. But that did nothing to stop him from purchasing a sprawling estate, like other environmentalists such as Barack Obama and Bob Dole, enjoying having as many as 16 bathrooms in these estates. Of course, the fact that these people buy private jets doesn’t mean they’re not opinionated about you driving a car and eating real beef.

You know, the ol’ rules for thee, but not for me.

Nature worshippers, including those who treat “Mother Nature” as a literal personal entity, are living a collective delusion. A person can learn a lot about nature just by reading a guide on how to identify edible plants. In so doing, a person would learn that a day in the woods is not like a trip to the supermarket. The fact is, nature doesn’t give a care about us, not nearly enough to make it easy to tell the difference between a plant that lets us live another day or poisons a person dead.

It’s because of this that the human relationship with nature is one of mistrust, and as soon as we developed the capability to subdue it, we were right to do so.

There is something about neo-environmentalism that’s unsettling, and that’s the creepy undertone that views humans as the bad guy, or that the growth of the human population is something to respond to with tighter top-down controls, with deference to the will of wealthy coastal technocrats, moral authoritarians, and the other unsavory forms of scientism. While they have no problem with telling the rest of us how to live our lives, one simple question makes them disintegrate like vampires in daylight:

If you think this is such a good idea, why aren’t you doing it?

Odds are it’s because the political elites don’t want to live in one-bedroom apartments, subsisting on cheap pasta and taking mass-transit to work a minimum-wage job. Political elites like Prince Harry, Barack Obama, and Bob Dole consume immensely more than the average ordinary human being living today, and they prefer to keep it that way.

I wonder whether Greta Thunberg is aware that this is the case? Maybe that girl should be more careful about who she plays with.

So, how about it, hyper-rich environmentalists? Why not be the change you want to see, if it means anyone will take you seriously? What’s stopping you? It’s obvious what the answer is, and that’s that you still want more than the average person.

So, here’s an idea: let’s reward a person proportionately based on their contributions to society. That way, a person would have more if they earn it, based on what they do. If this were the system that were in place, then how would you justify having more than someone else?

Hard question? I’ll go first. I produce circuit boards that have defense and aerospace applications. What I do is difficult to become qualified to do, with about two-thirds of those who attempt the degree failing or dropping out. What I do, without question, makes the world a better place. I want a house, a couple cars, and the means to support a family well in excess of the replacement rate. I’ve earned it.

So, what does the typical hyper-rich environmentalist do? It’s not so much a question of whether they work for a living as it is whether they’ve worked at all. In fact, if people stopped paying taxes, they wouldn’t have any income. Outside of foreign energy investments, just ask Hunter Biden.

The coronavirus epidemic has been played for political purposes, and a nature deity had been brought into it. That Was Actually The News.