Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing

[PrometheusShrugged]

Limousine Liberals are driven by an indelible class instinct to wind up benefiting those they convince themselves they are against.  This is not a conspiracy in the imaginary sense, where their fathers would instruct them, "You pretend to be a Liberal and pervert it into an impractical, disgusting, insulting, and threatening ideology in order to trick Middle America into supporting Conservatives."  Nevertheless, it has the same effect as that.  Modern leftists can't claim that they are sincere, however, because lying to themselves is the worst form of insincerity.

The development of Nature creates class mobility.  That is pretty much the story of America.  It was the story here until we became a country based on birth, not worth.  So Environmentalism deprives Middle America of high-paying jobs and low prices.  It is also a form of hoarding, artificially creating shortages so the Right Wing has a pretext to gouge us.  Republicans are Chickenhawks who don't believe in anything else they stand for either, so don't believe they really want us to "Drill, Baby, Drill!"  Being self-sufficient in petroleum would drastically lower the profits of these greedheads.

[Richard S Courtney]

PrometheusShrugged:

I do wish Americans would stop asserting that 'environmentalism' and 'global warming' catastrophism are "left wing".

Such 'isms' are independent of left-right political leanings almost everywhere.  In Europe 'environmentalism' is the normal stance of almost all the right-wing and center-right political parties.

Many across the entire political spectrum promote sound science whether or not that science supports or opposes 'environmentalism'.  For example, I am a left-wing socialist who has been opposing the 'global warming' scare since before most Americans had heard of it.

All of us who oppose 'junk science' need to unite in our common support of promotions of good scientific practice.  In my opinion, we should not divide ourselves on the basis of political, religious and/or philosophical differences.

Richard

[sunsettommy]

Limousine Liberals are driven by an indelible class instinct to wind up benefiting those they convince themselves they are against.  This is not a conspiracy in the imaginary sense, where their fathers would instruct them, "You pretend to be a Liberal and pervert it into an impractical, disgusting, insulting, and threatening ideology in order to trick Middle America into supporting Conservatives."  Nevertheless, it has the same effect as that.  Modern leftists can't claim that they are sincere, however, because lying to themselves is the worst form of insincerity.

The development of Nature creates class mobility.  That is pretty much the story of America.  It was the story here until we became a country based on birth, not worth.  So Environmentalism deprives Middle America of high-paying jobs and low prices.  It is also a form of hoarding, artificially creating shortages so the Right Wing has a pretext to gouge us.  Republicans are Chickenhawks who don't believe in anything else they stand for either, so don't believe they really want us to "Drill, Baby, Drill!"  Being self-sufficient in petroleum would drastically lower the profits of these greedheads.

I wonder what caused you make this post,it seems to be disconnected?

[sunsettommy]

PrometheusShrugged:

I do wish Americans would stop asserting that 'environmentalism' and 'global warming' catastrophism are "left wing".

Such 'isms' are independent of left-right political leanings almost everywhere.  In Europe 'environmentalism' is the normal stance of almost all the right-wing and center-right political parties.

Many across the entire political spectrum promote sound science whether or not that science supports or opposes 'environmentalism'.  For example, I am a left-wing socialist who has been opposing the 'global warming' scare since before most Americans had heard of it.

All of us who oppose 'junk science' need to unite in our common support of promotions of good scientific practice.  In my opinion, we should not divide ourselves on the basis of political, religious and/or philosophical differences.

Richard

In my personal forum experience,democrats and environmentalists are commonly the main supporters of AGW based science,and will fight you on the details of real data,but at the same time defend unverified climate models.

Conservatives along with Libertarians are often climate realists and will dispute the AGW claims,along with basing their position on real data from Satellites and other official data centers.Often express some skepticism over climate models as well.

However I agree that we should not fall for labeling groups of people as if that is a rational way to argue with anyone.An excercise that is fraught with problems and does not further the aim of a continous discussion of a topic.

It is the SUPPORT for rational and valid science research that should be done and one EVERYONE should be supporting and leave out the politics as much as we can.

Richard has described a political philosophy that is in conflict with mine,but we never have any problems with that anyway,since we are for opposing junk science and not to argue over political beliefs,which I think is contaminating valid science research.He post thoughtful comments here as well as in my forum too,all in the interest of science.

Anyone who saw how I went after Stoneybaby hard in this forum,should realize that I hate deliberately dishonest comments,and will attack it,no matter what the political philosophy the person has!

[PrometheusShrugged]

All of you stubbornly stick to the idea that ideologies are genuine.  Debates based on the illusion that these disguises are worth discussing only wind up superficial.  Ideology is a food fight at a prep school; we are misled by an illegitimate class to overlook the power and dishonesty of those who dominate by birth and not worth.  We are bombarded with fictional, pointless, but seductive scripts that hide what is going on behind the scenes.  Maybe only repetition will get through to you, since repetition of Big Lies has been what has led you into believing what you are told.

Bullies say, "Do this because I told you to do it."  Advanced bullies say, "Do this because I told you that the reasons I gave you for doing it make sense.  I lowered myself to actually give you an explanation, so you better not dare to question the explanation."

[Pooh]

Here is the Socialist view of the Climate Change "Crisis"

DSA USA. “Toward An Economic Justice Agenda.” Political. Democratic Left, May 2008.
http://www.dsausa.org/pdf/eja_may2008.pdf

Page 11.  
"Treat The Global Environment as the Ultimate Public Good
"A healthy environment, the ultimate public good, is gravely threatened by a system that rewards insatiable corporate greed. The threat to the planet due to carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels will be a major challenge facing humanity in the 21st century.
"We believe that it is possible to sustain economic development in the developing world while protecting natural resources and controlling the burning of fossil fuels. While it is true that development increases per-capita energy use, massive evidence shows that birth rates decline as societies develop industrially. Therefore, it would be self-defeating to attempt to protect the world’s environment by keeping in place the enormous gap in the standard of living between the global north and the global south.
"The United States is both the world’s largest producer of CO2 emissions and—at least among developed nations—the most inefficient consumer of energy. Therefore, the responsibility for dealing with this crisis falls on U.S citizens more than any others. Improvements in public transportation and regional planning can not only dramatically reduce energy waste, commuting time, and stress but also begin to reverse the race and class segregation characteristic of suburban sprawl. As a start, we need massive programs for research and development of renewable energy resources, public transportation, and retrofitting of buildings for energy conservation now. The kind of changes that would reduce U.S. per capita energy consumption, even to European levels, will require a level of domestic mobilization not seen since World War II. The high-wage jobs that would be thus created would not be exportable and would renew the possibility of a confident, upwardly mobile industrial working class.
"A transformed U.S would provide a quality of life equal or superior to what we have now."
"The challenge of climate change is an economic, scientific, and labor issue much more than a traditional environmental issue.
"Therefore, we advocate that the labor movement take the lead in pushing Congress to enact a massive program of public investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy, as proposed by the Apollo Alliance, which sees clean energy and more jobs as reinforcing each other.
Fresh water and biodiversity are also renewable but finite resources being exploited unsustainably. The privatization of water, another essential public good, is a critical issue in much of the world and needs to be resisted and reversed.
"In short, we need a global Marshall Plan for sustainable development to reverse the race to the bottom in wages, taxation, health, and environmental regulation. It can be funded by a global punitive “Tobin tax” on speculative transfers of funds and currency in and out of the financial and stock markets of developing nations."
Anonymous. “XXIII Congress of the Socialist International, Athens Global Solidarity: The courage to make a difference.” Socialist International, June 30, 2008. http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=1272.

SPEAKERS - THEME I
ACTING NOW ON CLIMATE CHANGE To achieve a sustainable world society
PANEL TWO - How do we strengthen the multilateral architecture for a sustainable future?
...
    * Carol Browner, Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton, Member of Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society
http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=1272
The talk by Browner, currently Obama's Energy Czar, vanished from the Socialist International site around the time of her appointment.

[LarryOldtimer]

From what the eco-whackos and warm-mongering nits are saying, better invest in some high quality goose down comforters . . . a good many of them, and certainly some low temperature sleeping bags.  And be sure to drain any water pipes which are above the frost line, else they burst from freezing.

"The weather outside is frightful, but the fire inside . . ." Oops, no fires allowed, as they produce the dreaded Carbon Dioxide.

[PrometheusShrugged]

Here is the Socialist view of the Climate Change "Crisis"

DSA USA. “Toward An Economic Justice Agenda.” Political. Democratic

Socialism is a trick.  You know perfectly well what class most socialists come from, so obey your first impression that they are on their Daddy's side.  They lie to themselves about what they are, which is the worst form of insincerity.  Don't believe that this preppy puppet show presents anything worth debating.
Liberals are agents of the Right Wing; that's why they are called "Limousine Liberals."  They don't have minds of their own, but are driven by an indelible class instinct to purposely act impractical, disgusting, insulting, or threatening to trick you into supporting the economic bullies in reaction to the Left's provocation.

[Pooh]

PromethesusShrugged (Re: « Reply #7 on: Today at 02:47:48 pm ») --

I sincerely hope that my post did not come across as an endorsement of the position of DSAUSA, etc.

Rather, the opposite.  The quotation shows that the main objective of "Democratic Socialists" is not environment, nor even the climate.  The environment is merely a stalking horse for the real objective: power to the Marxists.  Review the DSA quotation either above or from the source itself (http://www.dsausa.org/pdf/eja_may2008.pdf).

Fossil Fuels are the source of almost 70% of the energy used in the United States.  Nuclear provides 20%, but is anathema to the radical Left.
Per: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html  For Marxists, what better way to seize the means of production?

Removed "nonsense" string: %3Cdiclass=%22msgbox%22%3ENoilesuploaded!%3C/di%3E%3Cbr%3E%3Cbr%3E

[JohnWho2]

"Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing" in the title appears to be somewhat shortened - maybe it wouldn't all fit?

I believe the correct phrase should be:

"Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing of the Far-Left"

 

[PrometheusShrugged]

"Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing" in the title appears to be somewhat shortened - maybe it wouldn't all fit?

I believe the correct phrase should be:

"Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing of the Far-Left"

 

There is no such thing as a Left, so you are misunderstanding my revelation as an attack on a part of the mythical Left Wing.  Capitalism is socialism for the rich, Socialism is state capitalism initiated by the children of the rich.  Their is no valid, rational, and reality-based ideology; all this babble is just a decoy to distract us from the illegitimacy of hereditary power and the over-reaching greed of those who hand it down.  But you have been programmed to fit every revelation into this Matrix illusion that what you're told by those appointed to positions from which to tell you the thoughts available is worth listening to.

[JohnWho2]

There is no such thing as a Left,  ...

But the "Right" exists?

Whatever it is to the right of, is part of what is Left.

What's so hard about that?

[PrometheusShrugged]

But the "Right" exists?

Whatever it is to the right of, is part of what is Left.

What's so hard about that?

Those who aren't born rich or who don't humiliate themselves to become flunkies are what's left, but are not the Left in the sense of an opposition.  We are the grass and they are the lawnmower.  Conservatives are chickenhawks, so they don't believe in anything else they stand for either.  You are implying that there is an independent alternative, whatever is not what the Right claims to believe in.  I never said that the Right exists, did I?  Because you want to submit to some Master's ideological changes, you need this strawman opposition and you need to pretend you believe in something when you don't even believe in yourself.

[JohnWho2]

There is no such thing as a Left,  ...

Then there is no such thing as a Right?

Yet, you title this thread "Environmentalists are agents of the Right Wing"!

There is only a Right wing, but there isn't a left? 

You make no sense.

Beyond that, at least here in the US, the majority of the Environmentalists (if not all) are from the far left.  Many of these are "born rich or who ... humiliate themselves to become flunkies" (whatever that means), although many just evolve into their beliefs.

 

[LarryOldtimer]

Right wing, left wing . . . and those that fall in between, and those who fall outside the artificial limits . . . what indeed is to be made of all of these terms?  I think that the term that Josef Stalin used was the best.  For those who would espouse communism, without having the faintest idea of what the ultimate results would be, or how dreadful for those who expoused communism things would turn out to be . . . Stalin used the term "useful idiots".  Useful for the cause of communism, and idiots for thinking they themselves would prosper from it or even be the lest better off when it came to be.

There was no shortage at all of useful idiots back then, and there is no shortage of useful idiots as of now.  If anything, there are many more of them as of now than back when Stalin was in power.  The cause espoused today might be whacko environmentalism, or whacko economics, or whacko anything.  Even whacko Anthropogenic Global Warming.  The useful idiots expousing any of these sorts of things will be harmed, and badly harmed, if the whacko cause comes to be in power, or if significant governmental controls and higher taxes are put in place due to the actions of whackos.