Campus Reform’s Cabot Phillips recently traveled to the University of Miami to ask students for their take on the “Green New Deal” proposal recently introduced by Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Initially, each student supported the measure — until Phillips explained what’s actually in it.
The Green New Deal, a grab-bag of progressive and socialist goals with a veneer of environmentalism and social justice, was immediately endorsed by a number of top Democrats and 2020 presidential contenders after its release.
The resolution’s aims are absurd and unattainable, such as eliminating our nation’s use of fossil fuels and nuclear energy within 10 years in favor of 100 percent renewable energy, the elimination of air travel and the internal combustion engine in favor of high-speed rail, and an “economic security” provision that would provide money, health care and housing to those who were “unable or unwilling to work.” (Emphasis added.)
When Phillips first asked the college kids about the plan, they said they liked its “progressive” and ambitious goals to save the world from climate change, with one student even suggesting that simply knowing who had endorsed it was enough to earn his support.
Everything changed, however, once Phillips shared some of the ludicrous provisions of the plan, such as those mentioned above, at which point all of the students expressed their shock at the “extreme” measures proposed in the plan.
Regarding the goal to eliminate the use of carbon-emitting fossil fuels — coal, natural gas, oil — within ten years, many of the students expressed their disapproval. One woman said doing so in that time frame wouldn’t be “feasible,” while a male student worried about the “economic impact” such an “extreme” measure would have on global markets, while another simply said it “sounds like a reach.”
On the topic of providing economic security to those unwilling to work, the students were in agreement that doing so would be unfair to those who do work and contribute to society.
“If you are not willing to contribute to society, I don’t think that the people who are contributing should pay for you. So I disagree with that,” one young man said. His friend sitting across the table added, “Everyone needs to contribute. That’s the only way that society works.”
When it came to eliminating all air travel in favor of high-speed rail within ten years, students called such a goal “drastic” and “extreme.” While one student said he liked the idea of more travel options, he said eliminating air travel altogether isn’t the right way to go.
One student simply replied with a shake of his head, “I can’t see that happening, honestly.”
After explaining those details of the plan to the students, Phillips asked if their perception of the plan more generally had changed.
One female student said, “Sometimes you need to take extreme measures to save the environment, but I don’t think that is like … I think it’s a bit too extreme.”
“I don’t agree with us having to take away flying in the air, I don’t agree with taking away coal and things like that, and I don’t agree with everyone getting money for doing nothing,” another student said.
There is a common perception among older Americans that the younger generations, particularly those in college, are hopelessly indoctrinated to the progressive left’s radical socialist agendas, when in reality it is simply that far too many young people are terribly ill-informed about the actual details of the leftist policies they claim to support.
Hope remains for some of those young Americans, as it appears that once they have been properly informed of the details of what the left is doing, they reject those ideas and stand in support of the truth and the reality of the world around them.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.