By Peter Glover
Threats
to life and limb, property destruction, public smears, curtailing free speech
and imposing un-democratic regulatory laws are associated with totalitarianism.
The green-shirts of eco-fascism fit neatly into this category
I read
William Golding’s superb book Lord of the Flies as a kid. It had a lasting impact.
Especially about how the thin veneer of civilization, democracy, liberty and
prevailing morality can be swept away by a brutish elitist power grab. It’s the
same philosophy that resorts to threats to life and limb, property destruction,
public smears, vilifying dissent, curtailing free speech and imposing un-democratic
regulatory ‘laws’ to get its way.
We tend to associate these hallmarks of totalitarian intolerance, vicious rhetoric and Luddite terrorism with brown-shirted National Socialism, red-book toting Communism or radical Islamism; movements alien to Judeo-Christian-rooted Western culture. But the same kind of rhetoric, threats to dissent and the push to circumvent the normal democratic processes are also close to home among the green-shirts of burgeoning eco-fascism.
A little harsh? Consider this.
Gaia Theorist and climate visionary James Lovelock has
just become the latest high-profile alarmist to admit the movement never
actually knew what it was talking about. Lovelock recanted his climate alarmist sins admitting, “The problem is we don’t know what the
climate is doing”. True enough. But previously Lovelock was
one of many quite
prepared to “put democracy on hold” for the cause (leftie code
for ‘stopping you and I from having a say’ and them getting their way).
Since Lovelock’s defection, former alarmist colleagues
have been busy trying to find a low-carbon emitting bus to throw him under. In his Forbes blog, environmental writer Steve Zwick claimed Lovelock is “not a climate scientist, let alone
a contributor to the IPCC. Most
climate scientists cringe when he starts to talk about the climate.” Shame he didn’t warn us before Lovelock went AWOL that he was really a
non-believer all along.
But then Zwick is
intolerant only to those who disagree with him. Zwick’s combustable rhetoric resonates more with early
National Socialism than with Lovelock’s restrained academia. Even as polar
bears, penguins, glaciers and icy seas are
all reportedly flourishing – all contrary to alarmist predictions – Zwick’s intolerance has an unmistakable Kristallnacht-style resonance. In his Forbes
blog, Zwick demands,
“Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make
them pay. Let’s let their houses burn”. Shocked at reading back his own
inflammatory rhetoric, Zwick feebly tries to damp down the public
response in various addendum blogs.
Not
that we should misrepresent him. Zwick does not advocate burning down the
houses of skeptics now you understand. Zwick merely
wants to exact revenge after the warming apocalypse breaks, advocating
standing idly by as skeptics’ houses mysteriously spontaneously combust. I
believe the KKK has
a similar policy.
A brief perusal of his Facebook page
reveals Zwick is
a ‘follower’ and defender of the character of Peter Gleick. Gleick, for the uninitiated, is the
environmental scientist who recently hit
the headlines as a proven liar when he impersonated a member of the
Heartland Institute – whose crime was to disagree with Gleick on
climate issues – to steal some of their documentation. It’s what eco-fascists
don’t like to call ‘criminal deception’.
Journalist Alex Lockwood (in
the leftwing UK Guardian) proposes “the internet should be nationalized as
a public utility in order to contain the superfluous claims of warming
skeptics”. Fred Pearce (again in the UK Guardian) demands we “silence the
doubters”. At the 2007 Live Earth concert, Robert F. Kennedy called
for skeptics to be “treated as traitors” following this up with the demand that
all coal execs “should be in jail for all eternity”.
Fascist
intolerance? We’re only getting started.
Alarmist high priest James Hansen has called for skeptics to be put on trial for “high crimes against humanity”. Hansen has also endorsed a book by Keith Farnish that advocates sabotage and environmental terrorism by blowing up dams and demolishing cities to return us to an agrarian age
Alarmist high priest James Hansen has called for skeptics to be put on trial for “high crimes against humanity”. Hansen has also endorsed a book by Keith Farnish that advocates sabotage and environmental terrorism by blowing up dams and demolishing cities to return us to an agrarian age
Kari
Norgaard is professor of climate change at the University of Oregon. At a
recent London conference she called for skeptics to be viewed as “racists” and
climate skepticism as a “sickness” needing to be “treated”. And the infamous Climategate
emails scandal revealed key contributors to the UN IPCC reports threatening
science editors, burying data and sounding generally like Richard M. Nixon at
his most paranoid.
Surely we can expect better from government-sponsored
officials? Apparently not. The above mentioned Professor Norgaard has recently urged President Obama to “ignore democracy” and act on climate via executive
fiat. She also backed Obama’s appointment of John P. Holdren – an
avowed eugenist who
has called for a “planetary regime” to enforce abortions and mandatory
sterilization programs – as his senior advisor on science and technology
issues. Eugenist? Ah, enforced population control. Isn’t that what the German
National Socialists were most famous for practising? Not to mention Stalin, Mao
and Pol Pot – leftists all – of course.
In 2007, US EPA chief, Michael T. Eckhart was exposed as authoring an email threatening to
“destroy” the career of a climate skeptic. In April this year, a senior
Obama-appointee to the EPA boasted that the agency’s “philosophy” is to
“crucify” and “make examples” of US energy producers – the people without whom
all modern society would grind to a halt, by the way.
Let’s sum up for a moment: burning houses, threats to
life, limb, business, destroying careers, inflammatory rhetoric, deception,
lies and preventing free speech. The message from the eco-fascist Left is
resolute: don’t mess with us, or else. These are not guys Joe Public would want to break
bread with.
And we should also be clear about this: fascism per se has its roots in the beliefs and ideology of the
radical Left, not as is often portrayed, the Right, radical or otherwise.
German National socialism (it still exists), communism, even Islamism, all favour Big
Government, centralized power and control, the subversion of democratic
processes and, especially, the restriction of liberty and free speech.
If fascism in any guise doesn’t get what it wants, it
has always sought ways of grabbing power first by bullying others to keep
silent, then asserting the need to “put democracy on hold”. We can all
understand the extreme need in times of war. But as Lovelock says, we have no idea what the climate
is doing. Yet the eco-fascists are gaining social headway, imposing their will
through regulatory ‘laws’ often emanating from unaccountable quangos (quasi-non-governmental
organizations), unelected czars and other un-democratic agencies.
Still not convinced things are that bad? Well here’s
my last shot.
In April the US Department of Homeland Security
released its Environmental Justice Strategy. It makes provision to incorporate the
notion of “environmental justice” as a “homeland security” issue. If you
thought Homeland was all about keeping citizens safe from terrorists, think
again. Under President Obama they are about to create local “federal law
enforcement” agents empowered specifically to enforce green laws and
regulations in the name of “securing the homeland”. In short, a green police
force. If it can happen in the land of the free, how long before the cop
green-print recycles to socialist Europe?
In February Audi ran a classy Super Bowl TV ad (see
below) featuring the coming eco-cop units as an incentive to buy their latest
green car. It’s very funny. But if it doesn’t also send a chill down the spine,
you’re probably dead – or Steve Zwick.
"The
desire to squeeze and hurt was over-mastering."
- William Golding, Lord of
the Flies, Ch. 7"Which is better--to have laws and agree, or to hunt and kill?"
- William Golding, Lord of the Flies, Ch. 11
No comments:
Post a Comment