The increasingly nutty columnist unearths a novel historical counterfactual:

In the 1970s and early '80s, having seized control of the U.N. apparatus (by power of numbers), Third World countries decided to cash in. OPEC was pulling off the greatest wealth transfer from rich to poor in history. Why not them? So in grand U.N. declarations and conferences, they began calling for a "New International Economic Order." The NIEO's essential demand was simple: to transfer fantastic chunks of wealth from the industrialized West to the Third World....

The idea of essentially taxing hardworking citizens of the democracies to fill the treasuries of Third World kleptocracies went nowhere, thanks mainly to Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher (and the debt crisis of the early '80s). They put a stake through the enterprise.

Yes, if the Democrats had remained in power, surely they would have enacted their plan raise fantastic new sums to be transfered to Third World kleptocrats. Remember Walter Mondale's promise at the 1984 Democratic National Convention to "close schools in Newark and open them in Nairobi"? Thank goodness the Republicans saved us from that.

The rest of the column is a Glen Beck-esque rant about how global elites manufactured the climate crises in order to create a pretext for their socialist agenda. I thought this plea for majoritiarianism at the end was amusing:

If you want to revolutionize society -- as will drastic carbon regulation and taxation in an energy economy that is 85 percent carbon-based -- you do it through Congress reflecting popular will. Not by administrative fiat of EPA bureaucrats.

Oh, so in his belief in "popular will," I take it Krauthammer will now start crusading for climate legislation to be approved by majority vote in the Senate, rather than allowing Senators representing 36% of the population to halt it?