{"id":449595,"date":"2026-06-10T09:43:19","date_gmt":"2026-06-10T16:43:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=449595"},"modified":"2026-06-10T09:43:21","modified_gmt":"2026-06-10T16:43:21","slug":"the-hubris-of-the-common-good-mariana-mazzucatos-latest-manifesto-for-managed-capitalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=449595","title":{"rendered":"The Hubris of the ‘Common Good’: Mariana Mazzucato’s Latest Manifesto for Managed Capitalism"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

From Tilaks\u00b4s Substack<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Review of The Common Good Economy by Mariana Mazzucato (Allen Lane, 2026, 352 pp.)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Tilak Doshi<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mariana Mazzucato has made a career out of telling governments what they already want to hear \u2014 that they are not merely the fixers of last resort but the architects of prosperity itself. With The Common Good Economy<\/a><\/em>, her latest offering from Allen Lane, the UCL economist and policy entrepreneur has taken this flattering message to its logical terminus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If her previous work, The Entrepreneurial State<\/em> (2013) and Mission Economy<\/em> (2021), argued that the state deserves more credit for innovation and more latitude in directing investment, The Common Good Economy<\/em> goes further. It argues that the very purpose of economic life must be reoriented around a collective moral vision, curated and administered by enlightened institutions operating according to principles of \u201cdirectionality,\u201d \u201cco-creation,\u201d \u201cparticipation,\u201d and \u201creciprocity.\u201d The book is long, earnest, and rich with the vocabulary of progressive policy circles. It is also, at its philosophical core, a work of considerable intellectual presumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The book\u2019s central conceit \u2014 stated with disarming confidence on page 3 \u2014 is that modern economics has been trapped in a narrow, individualistic framework ever since Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations<\/em> in 1776 and that this framework \u201clacks a coherent theory of the common good\u201d. This framing, Mazzucato asserts, is not just incomplete but morally deficient \u2014 a catastrophic narrowing that has robbed economic governance of purpose, direction, and solidarity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The implication, barely concealed throughout, is that the classical liberal tradition from Smith to Hayek and Friedman is in essence a prolonged evasion of humanity\u2019s deepest social obligations. It takes a Professor Mazzucato — drawing on a potted tour of Aristotle, Cicero, Aquinas, \u201cindigenous knowledge\u201d traditions and the biology of ecosystems — to finally see what they could not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is, to put it plainly, a remarkable claim. And it deserves a sustained examination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Smith Knew About the Common Good<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let us begin with the treatment of Adam Smith which is symptomatic of the book\u2019s deeper problem. Mazzucato acknowledges, to her credit, that Smith was not simply the apostle of laissez-faire atomism that critics often caricature. She notes (p. 35) that Smith also wrote The Theory of Moral Sentiments<\/em> (1759) which gives a rich account of human nature rooted in empathy and the desire for approbation of an impartial spectator that functions as an internal moral compass. This ethical framework explains why self-interested actors in commercial society can be trusted to uphold contracts, cultivate reputation, and restrain predation: their conduct is shaped by social norms, justice, and the innate human drive to be worthy of esteem, not mere utility-maximization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So far, so good. But then Prof. Mazzucato proceeds to construct an argument that implies Smith\u2019s framework was nonetheless fatally narrow, ultimately producing a tradition incapable of grasping the \u2018common good\u2019 in any robust sense. The neoclassical school is, in this telling, Smith\u2019s unfortunate heir \u2014 a tradition that reduced his rich moral philosophy to the aggregation of self-interested maximisers and market-failure corrections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Mazzucato conspicuously fails to engage with is the question of whether Smith \u2014 and Hayek and Friedman after him \u2014 actually understood the common good perfectly well and reached different conclusions about the best institutional means of achieving it. Smith\u2019s invisible hand is not an assertion that self-interest is morally admirable; it is an empirical claim about how, under conditions of voluntary exchange and competitive markets, the pursuit of individual advantage tends to serve the general welfare more reliably than the best intentions of planners and ministers. Smith spent much of Book IV of The Wealth of Nations<\/em> excoriating the mercantile system \u2014 the crony capitalism of his day \u2014 precisely because it corrupted public policy in the interests of particular factions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hayek\u2019s Road, Friedman\u2019s Rule, and the Knowledge Problem Mazzucato Ignores<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The absence of a serious engagement with Hayek and Friedman is perhaps the book\u2019s most telling intellectual gap. Neither thinker appears as a meaningful interlocutor anywhere in the tome\u2019s 352 pages. Hayek\u2019s entire project – from The Road to Serfdom<\/em> (1944) through The Constitution of Liberty<\/em> (1960) to his Nobel lecture \u201cThe Pretence of Knowledge<\/a><\/em>\u201c (1974) – was animated by precisely the question that Mazzucato claims to be answering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hayek\u2019s answer was that the common good cannot be coherently defined and administered by a central authority, because the knowledge required to do so \u2014 knowledge of local conditions, individual preferences, and the dynamic consequences of interventions \u2014 is dispersed across millions of actors and cannot be aggregated by any planning body, however expert and well-intentioned. The price system, in Hayek\u2019s account, is not a device for satisfying individual greed; it is a communications network that transmits and coordinates information across the entire economy in a way that no bureaucratic process can replicate. The market is a discovery procedure \u2014 a mechanism for creating knowledge that no one possesses in advance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mazzucato\u2019s vision of the common good economy rests on governments \u201cshaping markets\u201d rather than merely \u201cfixing\u201d them \u2014 setting the direction of innovation and investment. She wants government to shift from a reactive corrector to a proactive mission-setter, guiding business, finance, and labour toward collectively determined outcomes. Her vision of purposeful economic governance claims to possess exactly the kind of comprehensive knowledge that Hayek argued was impossible to possess. The book never confronts this problem. The word \u201cHayek\u201d does not appear in the index.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Milton Friedman, too, is conspicuous by his absence. Friedman\u2019s arguments for economic freedom<\/a> to protect individuals from the arbitrary power of bureaucrats find no space in her book. One may disagree with Friedman\u2019s conclusions, as many serious economists do. But the intellectual tradition he represented deserves to be engaged, not ignored. Mazzucato\u2019s implicit suggestion throughout the book \u2014 that the liberal and market-oriented tradition of the past two centuries has been a sustained failure to think about collective welfare \u2014 is not an argument. It is a rhetorical presumption masquerading as a finding. A cursory examination of data on human welfare<\/a> \u2013 the sustained lifting of millions of people from poverty and deprivation by market-oriented economies \u2013 seems to escape Mazzucato\u2019s attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Compass That Cannot Navigate<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the heart of the book\u2019s second section is what Mazzucato calls the \u201ccommon good compass\u201d \u2014 a framework built around five principles: purpose and directionality, co-creation and participation, collective learning and knowledge sharing, access for all and reward sharing, and transparency and accountability. These are presented as the organising principles of a reformed economy in which governments shape markets to serve human flourishing rather than simply correcting their failures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The principles sound admirable, as such principles generally do. But the further one reads, the more one is struck by the distance between the framework\u2019s aspirational vocabulary and its practical specificity. What precisely does it mean for government to \u201cshape markets\u201d? Mazzucato\u2019s main example is mission-oriented innovation policy \u2014 the model of the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) or the early-stage public investments that preceded the internet and GPS. These are real examples, and they lend support to the proposition that public investment has sometimes created the technological preconditions for private innovation. But from this observation \u2014 that government has occasionally and successfully taken long-horizon risks that private capital would not \u2014 Mazzucato draws the extraordinary conclusion that government should now systematically direct investment across the entire economy toward politically defined \u201cmissions\u201d in health, climate, and artificial intelligence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The empirical record of this kind of directional ambition is, to say the least, mixed. For each DARPA achievement, there is the far more typical Solyndra<\/a> which constituted a case study in cronyism and the failure of industrial policy. The book attributes the failure of previous industrial policies to their lack of Mazzucato\u2019s \u201ccommon good compass\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps. But Mazzucato offers no theory of political economy that would explain why democratic governments, subject to lobbying by organised special interests and bureaucratic over-reach, would reliably implement the \u201ccommon good\u201d however defined. This is not a pedantic objection. It is the central question of public choice<\/a> \u2014 a field developed precisely to understand why well-intentioned government programmes usually produce outcomes contrary to their stated aims. That tradition is missing from this book.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mazzucato seeks to distinguish between value creation and value extraction. The problem is that the argument requires a theory of value that can objectively determine what constitutes genuine economic contribution and what constitutes extraction. In The Common Good Economy<\/em>, this difficulty reappears in a new form. The book repeatedly invokes the distinction between value creation and rent extraction as though it were self-evident, applying it to finance (which mostly extracts), to tech billionaires (whose fortunes eclipse entire nations \u2014 p. 3), and to fossil fuel subsidies<\/a> (supposedly amounting to US$7 trillion globally in 2022 \u2014 p. 83). The reader who pauses to ask who decides where the line between value and rent lies \u2014 and by what procedure that decision is made \u2014 will find the question left unanswered. In Mazzucato\u2019s framework, it is apparently the mission-setting government, guided by the common good compass, that makes this determination. The sheer circularity of her claim is revealing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Technocracy in Philosopher\u2019s Clothing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reading The Common Good Economy<\/em>, one is struck by a persistent tension that the author never quite resolves. The book wants to be both a work of philosophical ambition \u2014 drawing on Aristotle\u2019s polis<\/em>, Cicero\u2019s salus populi<\/em>, Aquinas\u2019s Christian conception of flourishing, \u201cindigenous knowledge\u201d traditions, and the \u201cwisdom of biological ecosystems\u201d \u2014 and a practical policy manual for reorganising finance, taxation, business governance, public procurement, and international institutions toward collectively determined ends. The policy sections are, for the most part, a compendium of progressive orthodoxies espoused by WEF forums or UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose working papers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The deeper tension is this: if the common good is genuinely a matter of shared democratic deliberation \u2014 as the author repeatedly insists \u2014 then its content cannot be decided in advance by economists who have studied indigenous knowledge in the Amazon and walked through Barrio Silo\u00e9 in Cali. It can only be discovered through genuine participatory processes \u2014 as in Hayek\u2019s liberal market economy which coordinates people\u2019s actions in the context of tacit and dispersed knowledge \u2014 then the entire \u201ccompass\u201d framework, with its five principles and its tables distinguishing \u201cdynamic public value\u201d from mere \u201cstatic market analysis\u201d. It is not a discovery of the common good but an imposition of a particular UCL professor\u2019s preferred vision of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hayek saw this danger with characteristic clarity. The conceit of comprehensive rationalism \u2014 the belief that society\u2019s goals can be articulated, ranked, and pursued by a directing intelligence \u2014 was not, in his analysis, a recipe for the common good. It is the road toward serfdom<\/a>: the concentration of power in the hands of those who claim to know what the common good requires and who are willing to override voluntary arrangements in its name. Whether one fully accepts Hayek\u2019s warning or not, it deserves to be taken seriously by anyone proposing to reshape the entire architecture of economic governance around a mission-oriented common good compass administered by state actors. That Professor Mazzucato does not engage with it at all is an intellectual failing that no number of Rockefeller Foundation writing residencies can excuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So how goes the London Borough of Camden?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mariana Mazzucato\u2019s homepage<\/a> lands you on the quote by Quartz in bolded large font: \u201cOne of the world\u2019s most influential economists… on a mission to save capitalism from itself.\u201d One of her favourite self-congratulatory anecdotes in The Common Good Economy<\/em>\u2014repeated in her acknowledgements, Substack posts, and joint papers with Georgia Gould\u2014is her co-chairing of Camden Council\u2019s Renewal Commission<\/a> (2020\u20132022) and the subsequent rollout of four grand \u201cmissions\u201d in 2022. These were sold as a model of citizen-engaged, mission-oriented local governance: by 2030, leadership as diverse as the community; every young person with economic opportunity for safety and security (target 2025); everyone eating well with nutritious, affordable, \u201csustainable\u201d food; and housing estates that are \u201chealthy, sustainable, and creative\u201d. Mazzucato and Gould hail it as proof that the \u201ccommon good compass\u201d delivers real change through co-creation, procurement reform, and a \u00a330 million Community Wealth Fund.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The council trumpets \u201cOutstanding\u201d ratings from Ofsted and others for children\u2019s services, adult social care, and youth justice\u2014the only English authority with all three. Yet these are service delivery grades for expensive bureaucracies funded by one of the highest council tax burdens in London (another 4.99% rise in 2025\/26). Mazzucato\u2019s much-vaunted \u201ccollective learning,\u201d \u201cparticipation,\u201d and \u201cpre-distribution via conditionalities\u201d have yielded more reports, more partnerships, and more taxpayer-funded pilots\u2014while the borough\u2019s core pathologies (poverty traps, crime hotspots, housing shortages exacerbated by planning and welfare incentives) march on unchanged. The council\u2019s \u201cLeader\u2019s Annual Report 2025\/2026<\/a>\u201d explicitly states on page 1: \u201cToo many residents still feel disconnected from the opportunities around them, and with 42% of residents living in poverty and child poverty rates close to 40%.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is not a success story worthy of global acclaim or a \u201cnew compass\u201d for the common good. It is performative governance that substitutes slogans, citizen assemblies, and procurement checklists for the deregulation, opportunity and accountability that actually lifts people out of poverty. Gould departed the council in 2024 for Parliament (and a ministerial post); Mazzucato has moved on to bigger stages, gaining praise from UK prime minister Keir Starmer and his energy czar Ed Miliband<\/a>. Camden\u2019s residents, meanwhile, still live with the same high taxes, high crime, and high poverty that predated the missions. If this is Mazzucato\u2019s showcase for \u201cshaping markets\u201d and \u201ccollective value creation,\u201d it exposes the emptiness of the entire project. The invisible hand, not five-point compasses, remains the better bet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Common Good Economy<\/em> founding presumption \u2014 that two and a half centuries of classical political economy and its neoclassical progeny, from Adam Smith and David Ricardo through J. S. Mill and Alfred Marshall to Friedrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman, constituted a sustained failure to think adequately about the common good \u2014 is not a demonstrated finding. It is an assertion made in hubris, systematically misreading or ignoring the insights provided by eminent contributors to the history of economic thought.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The last word is best reserved for the inimitable Charlotte Gill<\/a>: \u201cMeet Professor Mazzucato, who can\u2019t get enough of the word \u2018mission\u2019\u201d whose \u201cmission-led mission [is] to use the word mission as much as mission possible\u201d. The good professor\u2019s mission is not only impossible but rather conceited in its premise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A version of this article was first published in the Daily Sceptic https:\/\/dailysceptic.org\/2026\/06\/08\/mariana-mazzucatos-latest-plea-for-do-gooders-and-busybodies-to-have-even-more-influence-over-the-economy-is-predictably-unpersuasive-unless-youre-ed-miliband\/<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr Tilak K. Doshi is the <\/em>Daily Sceptic\u2018s Energy Editor. He is an economist, a member of the CO2<\/sub> Coalition and a former contributor to Forbes. Follow him on Substack<\/a> and X<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mariana Mazzucato has made a career out of telling governments what they already want to hear \u2014 that they are not merely the fixers of last resort but the architects of prosperity itself. With The Common Good Economy, her latest offering from Allen Lane, the UCL economist and policy entrepreneur has taken this flattering message to its logical terminus.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":449597,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691843592,691830123,691820752,691843591,691843590,691843593],"class_list":["post-449595","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-book-reviews","tag-capitalism","tag-economics","tag-industrial-policy","tag-market-economy","tag-state-intervention","fallback-thumbnail"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/0-The-Hubris-of-the-Common-Good-Mariana-Mazzucatos-Latest-Manifesto-for-Managed-Capitalism.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1SXx","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":442131,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=442131","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":0},"title":"Miliband\u2019s Favourite Economist Doesn\u2019t Understand How Markets Work","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/01\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Ed Miliband, as Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero in the Labour government, spoke at a Good Growth Foundation event. He praised Mariana Mazzucato (UCL professor, often called the \"godmother of missions\") for shaping Labour's approach. Miliband framed the transition away from fossil fuels as delivering both\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Economics\"","block_context":{"text":"Economics","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=economics"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Milibands-Favourite-Economist-Doesnt-Understand-How-Markets-Work.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Milibands-Favourite-Economist-Doesnt-Understand-How-Markets-Work.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Milibands-Favourite-Economist-Doesnt-Understand-How-Markets-Work.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Milibands-Favourite-Economist-Doesnt-Understand-How-Markets-Work.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":444956,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=444956","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":1},"title":"Intellectual Yet Idiot: Ed Miliband and the Economic Illiteracy Driving Britain\u2019s Energy Crisis","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/18\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Yet, while the IPCC itself has finally abandoned the nonsense doomsday model it once promoted as the \u201cbaseline\u201d, British Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, his fellow net-zero zealots in Whitehall, and his globalist colleagues in power in the EU, Canada and elsewhere press ahead with Net Zero undeterred. Indeed, \u2018Mad Ed\u2019\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cIntellectual Yet Idiot\u201d\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cIntellectual Yet Idiot\u201d","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=intellectual-yet-idiot"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-ChatGPT-Intellectual-Yet-Idiot-Ed-Miliband-and-the-Economic-Illiteracy-Driving-Britains-Energy-Crisis.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-ChatGPT-Intellectual-Yet-Idiot-Ed-Miliband-and-the-Economic-Illiteracy-Driving-Britains-Energy-Crisis.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-ChatGPT-Intellectual-Yet-Idiot-Ed-Miliband-and-the-Economic-Illiteracy-Driving-Britains-Energy-Crisis.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-ChatGPT-Intellectual-Yet-Idiot-Ed-Miliband-and-the-Economic-Illiteracy-Driving-Britains-Energy-Crisis.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-ChatGPT-Intellectual-Yet-Idiot-Ed-Miliband-and-the-Economic-Illiteracy-Driving-Britains-Energy-Crisis.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":424524,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=424524","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":2},"title":"Germany\u2019s Chemical Reckoning: How Europe is Dismantling its Industrial Core","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\"The Agonising Decline of One of Europe\u2019s Core Industries,\" describes Germany's chemical sector crisis as a symptom of broader self-inflicted industrial decline in Europe. Energy and environment policy analyst Tilak Doshi argues that Germany's once-dominant chemical industry- home to giants like BASF and a cornerstone of \"Made in Germany\" manufacturing-\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"BASF\"","block_context":{"text":"BASF","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=basf"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/AQOCFTak7yim8mqtCRTCGJNEKcCnIeckTeha4Fi5GpE6TfG92gR2rtDtVNOQAxH0tDrvPas8AGczboH-9lNijqEnkKxVVzdfUqOt04Br2lFhaFe9VL5Mdq4YRbDy0gp5.jpeg?fit=1200%2C662&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/AQOCFTak7yim8mqtCRTCGJNEKcCnIeckTeha4Fi5GpE6TfG92gR2rtDtVNOQAxH0tDrvPas8AGczboH-9lNijqEnkKxVVzdfUqOt04Br2lFhaFe9VL5Mdq4YRbDy0gp5.jpeg?fit=1200%2C662&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/AQOCFTak7yim8mqtCRTCGJNEKcCnIeckTeha4Fi5GpE6TfG92gR2rtDtVNOQAxH0tDrvPas8AGczboH-9lNijqEnkKxVVzdfUqOt04Br2lFhaFe9VL5Mdq4YRbDy0gp5.jpeg?fit=1200%2C662&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/AQOCFTak7yim8mqtCRTCGJNEKcCnIeckTeha4Fi5GpE6TfG92gR2rtDtVNOQAxH0tDrvPas8AGczboH-9lNijqEnkKxVVzdfUqOt04Br2lFhaFe9VL5Mdq4YRbDy0gp5.jpeg?fit=1200%2C662&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/AQOCFTak7yim8mqtCRTCGJNEKcCnIeckTeha4Fi5GpE6TfG92gR2rtDtVNOQAxH0tDrvPas8AGczboH-9lNijqEnkKxVVzdfUqOt04Br2lFhaFe9VL5Mdq4YRbDy0gp5.jpeg?fit=1200%2C662&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":282264,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=282264","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":3},"title":"The Jupiter Effect: The Hubris of Green Central Planners","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Watts Up With That? In the annals of history, there have been countless tales of rulers and leaders who, in their hubris, believed they could command the very forces of nature. The ancient Roman god Jupiter, King of Gods, was believed to be above the fray of mere mortals, wielding\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-138.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-138.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-138.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-138.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253277,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=253277","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":4},"title":"Luxury Beliefs And Energy Policy: The Fatal Conceit","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/16\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In a remarkable\u00a0interview\u00a0on Wednesday with anchor Laura Ingraham of Fox News, Norman Fenton, Professor Emeritus of Risk at Queen Mary University of London, spelt out just what the \u201cnet zero\u201d economy really means.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00Luxury-beliefs.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00Luxury-beliefs.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00Luxury-beliefs.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00Luxury-beliefs.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00Luxury-beliefs.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":415262,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=415262","url_meta":{"origin":449595,"position":5},"title":"The Book That Rachel Reeves Should Read Before Her Budget \u2013 But Won\u2019t","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/29\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Autumn Budget is usually the largest fiscal event of the year, laying out the Government\u2019s taxation and spending priorities in the coming year. Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver her second Budget at around lunchtime on November 26th, after Prime Minister\u2019s Questions. The economic backdrop to this Budget is dire\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"doom loop\"","block_context":{"text":"doom loop","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=doom-loop"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMoIx8kCBvH9maMBYtSMqnwAIG3bhNjcV6F4L4RNOQrSxUUDhGB5585ABF3EN1-kQxP_wz6rN3ffQVPkBbpqMofuelZlvcwMNC-W44oA8UIlJCBNksn3XTOtzQYxvY.jpeg?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMoIx8kCBvH9maMBYtSMqnwAIG3bhNjcV6F4L4RNOQrSxUUDhGB5585ABF3EN1-kQxP_wz6rN3ffQVPkBbpqMofuelZlvcwMNC-W44oA8UIlJCBNksn3XTOtzQYxvY.jpeg?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMoIx8kCBvH9maMBYtSMqnwAIG3bhNjcV6F4L4RNOQrSxUUDhGB5585ABF3EN1-kQxP_wz6rN3ffQVPkBbpqMofuelZlvcwMNC-W44oA8UIlJCBNksn3XTOtzQYxvY.jpeg?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMoIx8kCBvH9maMBYtSMqnwAIG3bhNjcV6F4L4RNOQrSxUUDhGB5585ABF3EN1-kQxP_wz6rN3ffQVPkBbpqMofuelZlvcwMNC-W44oA8UIlJCBNksn3XTOtzQYxvY.jpeg?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMoIx8kCBvH9maMBYtSMqnwAIG3bhNjcV6F4L4RNOQrSxUUDhGB5585ABF3EN1-kQxP_wz6rN3ffQVPkBbpqMofuelZlvcwMNC-W44oA8UIlJCBNksn3XTOtzQYxvY.jpeg?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449595","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=449595"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449595\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":449605,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449595\/revisions\/449605"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/449597"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=449595"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=449595"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=449595"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}