The Politics of Climate Change
Part 1
Originally posted Oct. 9, 2019.
Quotes of the times:
“When the chips are down, I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it. This [rationing] has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not.” Mayer Hillman, senior fellow emeritus at Britain’s Policy Studies Institute, author of ‘How We Can Save the Planet.’ https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/10/climate-change-democracy-deniers.php
“Environmental tales of tragedy begin with Nature in harmony and almost always end in quasi-authoritarian politics.” Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, ‘Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility’ https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2009/02/greens-population-policies-global.html
“The problem is not simply that it is difficult to answer the question ‘Who speaks for nature?’ but rather that there is something profoundly wrong with the question itself. It rests on the premise that some people are better able to speak for nature, the environment, or a particular place than others. This assumption is profoundly authoritarian.” Ibid.
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” Timothy Wirth, president of the UN Foundation and member of the Club of Rome.
“The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security.” Maurice Strong, executive director of United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and member of the Club of Rome.
The modern story of global warming/climate change/climate emergency begins with an organization called the Club of Rome. Founded in 1968, the Club of Rome is one of many such organizations, that want to change the world and believe they have the right to do so. But to change the world, one needs a cause, with sufficient gravitas in order to persuade people, that they need to get actively involved, and become a ‘change agent’. The best causes for motivating people, are ones that appear threatening and provoke fear. In casting about for such a cause, the Club of Rome settled on the environment. Alexander King, one of the co-founders of the Club of Rome wrote:
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, ‘The First Global Revolution’ 1991, p. 115.
So, environmental issues were deliberately chosen, not because they were considered vital to the survival of humanity, but because they were considered the best available vehicle to carry forward a political agenda. This agenda would ultimately come to be falsely framed as humanity versus the planet. This means that humanity becomes the enemy. This means humanity must be controlled. This means that controlling CO2 emissions are just the beginning. Hark! You should have heard about the necessity of reducing the world’s population by now. Any volunteers? Don’t worry it’s all in hand – depopulation is already happening, and you haven’t even noticed.
Who are the members of the Club of Rome? Well, Al Gore for one, the high priest of the global warming cult – and soon to be the first global warming billionaire. And many of the other voices crying climate apocalypticism, are also members. The Club of Rome, have published numerous reports, books and articles. Perhaps their most well-known publication is ‘Limits to Growth’ which highlights the depopulation issue because the planet is running out of resources to sustain humanity. This lack of resources means that the political and economic systems that we currently live under need to be radically revamped. In other words, more control is required. This means that democracy is out – authoritarianism is in. Chinese style communism is being heralded as the solution to saving the planet:
If electoral democracy is inadequate to the task of addressing climate change, and the task is the most urgent one humanity faces, then other kinds of politics are urgently needed. The most radical alternative of all would be to consider moving beyond democracy altogether. The authoritarian Chinese system has some advantages when it comes to addressing climate change: One-party rule means freedom from electoral cycles and less need for public consultation. Technocratic solutions that put power in the hands of unelected experts could take key decisions out of the hands of voters. David Runciman, ‘Democracy is the Planet’s Biggest Enemy’, Foreign Policy Magazine (FP), July 20, 2019. Runciman is a Political Science professor at Cambridge University, author of ‘How Democracy Ends’.
Surely, you must have seen the signs – the signs of the climate change demonstrators. They don’t just want a reduction in CO2 levels – they want to change the world. They want what the Club of Rome wants. They want to put humanity in a strait jacket. They want to take away your freedom to eat meat. They want to take away your freedom to eat dairy products. They want to take away your freedom to travel by air. They want to take away your freedom to own a car. They want to take away your freedom to use energy. They want to take away your individual rights. They want you to give up everything that they demand, because your needs are not sustainable:
Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable. Maurice Strong, opening speech, Rio Earth Summit, Brazil, 1992.
Oh! And he also said this:
If we don’t change, our species will not survive… Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.
You see, you are the enemy. Your mere existence is the problem. You are not sustainable. But while you do exist, and before our industrialized civilisation collapses, they are going to tax you to death – where do you think Al Gore gets his millions from? But be grateful, they are saving the planet.
To be continued…
God bless,
Bruce Telfer.
