Reader Rant: Thanks!

Here’s the latest reader rant, along with my reply!

Zane writes: Just writing to say thanks. I’ve been sharing your links and articles on forums when you see people say “Eletric carz are teh futurer!!” (Exaggerating the idiocracy). Not the best at debating, but I always cite your articles and shared that video you posted in one with the phone battery getting stabbed and bursting into flames, then take a Google image of an EV chassis with the batteries on the floorboard saying imagine if you got into a bad accident with that. Besides that, I also mention that the only reason EVs are considered the future is because Uncle and the Globalists are pushing it, and that it wouldn’t be such if you removed the subsidies (which Orange Man did) and the manufactured hype while also suppressing the dangers and weaknesses such as batteries being affected by heat/cold, accelerating and using electronics and stuff drain battery, length it takes to charge battery and that youtube video of that yuge line, etc. Third thing I touch on is it’s been tried 100 years ago as you’ve mentioned and the same problems persist today, including range anxiety. That’s just strangers on the Internet, I’m sure it’s more effective with my friends and family. Either way, just wanted to thank you for the articles and links, I truly appreciate it. Keep doing what you’re doing, keep being awesome and keep up the great work!

My reply: It’s my pleasure! Or rather, it’s my obligation. What else can I do – as a car guy – when confronted by an anti-car agenda? More precisely, an anti-mobility agenda. That is what EVs are ultimately all about.

It isn’t coincidental that Elon Musk – who has served as the John the Baptist figure for the EV Cult – is the scion of a family of technocrats. His grandfather was one of the first of this tribe. Technocrats are a species of coercive collectivist who base their collectivism not on politics but on technology. They wish – they insist – that society be organized on the basis of the assembly line and the scientific method. That the individual contrarian who doesn’t wish to be governed by technology – that is, by technocrats who wield technology – is a stick-in-the-mud who must be “nudged” in the right direction.

Electric cars are a technocratic wet dream because they are much more easily controlled by technology. IC cars – especially older IC cars – exist much more independently; which is a stick-in-the-mud for the technocrats.

The problem was – how to sell EVs? For all the reasons discussed on this site, EVs are a hard sell because of their functional gimps and high cost. So they sold “climate change.” And then mandated (and subsidized) electric cars as the necessary and can’t-be-criticized solution to this manufactured problem.

Take away the “climate change” shibboleth and the EV house of cards collapses. “Ludicrous Speed” is appealing, but only so many people can afford it. Most people can’t afford to wait hours on line for a recharge.

Without “climate change,” EVs become what they have been since about 1920: A more expensive, less convenient form of transportation – by dint of which, they become like those absurd but sometimes interesting gadgets one sees advertised in the Sharper Image catalogue – like a life-sized Darth Vader bubble gum machine for $6,000.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!