Gutless Tony should tell CO2 truth

Anthropogenic global warming is a fraud. Anyone who objectively analyses the data can see that. Tony Abbott may know it, but, like many of his Liberal party colleagues, is too spineless to take a public stand. Looking at his ridiculously demagogic election slogan, we might think that if only he would actually do what it says and “stand up for Australia” then others in the community might feel more comfortable about expressing their own scepticism and the myth of anthropogenic global warming would begin collapsing in this country.

"Environmentalism" in its true political context

 

What we today call "environmentalism" is not a spontaneous philosophical phenomenon derived via any logical or scientific analysis. In a political context "environmentalism" is a conduit for an ideological tradition within a certain faction of societal and political ‘elites’ [1] that only started to manifest significantly in public policy after the Second World War. This faction is British-heavy and takes much of its propagandistic inspiration from 19th century British "economist" Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). It encompasses people like the Huxley Family, H.G. Wells, John D. Rockefeller (and his heirs), through to John Maynard Keynes, whose economic theories are the basis of today’s “stimulus packages” and indeed were the mainstay of establishment economic thought since the “Keynesian Revolution” of the late 1930’s.

 

One of the main organisations which continue this tradition today is the powerful Trilateral Commission, co-founded by David Rockefeller, grandson of John D. Rockefeller, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is the ideological father of Barack Obama and a major influence on former US President Jimmy Carter[2]. Obama’s administration, like the Carter administration, is top-heavy with Trilateral Commission members. Other contemporary figures include establishment economists, Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz.

 

The common theme among this group is the advocacy of a specific brand of massive government central planning, often to the point where the government is micro-managing every aspect of society, and the individual human being has no unique identity or worth. The centrepiece of their program is the United Nations organisation, of which they advocate the transformation into a world federal government [3], which would form the practical governmental framework through which the massive socialist central-planning was implemented.

 

To facilitate this end, which no sane person would support on its face, they favour a series of covering, conduit doctrines and policies that we now commonly identify as arch-leftist. "Environmentalism" is one of these conduits. Some of these doctrines have been moulded together into a sort of pseudo-ideology commonly called “political correctness”, which is essentially a brainwashing intellectual strait-jacket to prevent even the most objective, legitimate critical analysis.

 

Some of the most basic tenets of “political correctness” are its crude anti-Christian, anti-Western, anti-capitalism attitudes. Instilling these views into the general public through various means, especially into children via public schooling, acts to cut people away from the traditions of Western Civilisation that have made us so relatively prosperous and free and which put emphasis on individuals over the state. While Christianity is constantly bashed under the PC dictatorship, ecology and the non-human environment are treated with an illogical religious mysticism that goes far beyond anything in Christianity.

 

 

"Environmentalism" aims to alienate the western traditions that have made us so free and prosperous

 

 

In essence, what we see is not merely an attempt to remove the so-called "anti-scientific" Christianity and replace it with so-called "logic and reason", but an attempt to replace Christianity with a greater anti-scientific and illogical worship of the non-human environment. If the non-human environment is your organising principle then things like national sovereignty and economic freedom are de-emphasised because the “environment” doesn’t recognise national boundaries (as we constantly hear from the green zealots) and economic freedom is too risky. The problem is one of "market failure" as we so often hear from the various blabbers of the leftist media and think tanks.

 

When you see the barrage of eco-documentaries and anti-development news stories on the ABC, you are seeing propaganda at work. The idea is that if you show people enough high definition images of aesthetically-pleasing wild phenomena, they’ll start worshipping it like a religion and forget about the horrendous cruelty that occurs in the wild, like the inevitable (without human intervention) starving to death of an elephant that has shed its last chewing teeth or the torturing of a baby impala for the sake of teaching a cheetah cub how to hunt. They also want you to forget that humans are, in fact, a part of the natural environment, including all of our creations, and humans have contributed to easing the pain and suffering of animals via domestication. Your family pet has a much more comfortable and happy life than a wolf constantly having to hunt and fighting for survival.

 

The whole thing is essentially indirect misanthropy, because by emphasising a mystical importance to the non-human component of the environment, by direct implication, you de-emphasise and denigrate the importance of human beings and human civilisation. Aldous Huxley of the infamous Huxley family, wrote about this in his well-known book, A Brave New World, where he said that future civilisations will be totalitarian, not via coercion, but by way of actually convincing people to love their own servitude. That is what ‘environmentalism’ is at its heart, a way of convincing you to hate yourself and accept governmental control of every aspect of your life. Slavery, in other words.

 

Summary timeline of key events with regard to modern “environmentalism”

 

If we track back to the early 1950s, shortly after World War Two, we see that “environmentalism“, as we know it today, did not exist. There were no Ministers of ”the Environment” in governments, there were no government departments, there were no greenie protestors in sandals; there was almost nothing in the way of government legislation. So how did we get from that point, to the situation we have today, where these things are so inexorably ingrained in the general political and cultural zeitgeist? Did it emerge from the science community? No.

 

The first step was the United Nations (UN), created shortly after the Second World War. As stated previously, it was planned that the UN would eventually form the practical governmental framework through which the massive socialist central-planning was implemented. With the United Nations successfully established, the very same people began forming the non-government organisations which today epitomise what we think of as ‘environmentalism’. The World Conservation Union was founded in 1948 the arch-green World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) was founded in 1961.[4]

 

Julian Huxley was a central figure in the creation of two of these organisations.[4] Prior to this Huxley was, of course, instrumental in the creation of the United Nations and became the inaugural Director-General of UNESCO, a UN department charged with, among other things, propagandising the UN agenda to young school children [5], an activity it continues to this very day.

 

 

The WWF was particularly important because it helped popularise green ideology via the demagogic use of cute, fluffy animals, and today it is the flagship green organisation. The 1960s is also important as the beginning of the so-called “counter-culture” movement, into which green doctrines took hold. The “counter-culture” movement, which, in this aspect at least, was imposed top-down, helped catapult green ideology into political consideration.

 

Following the WWF we had the creation of Friends of the Earth (1969) and Greenpeace (1971). The intense propaganda and government lobbying of these organisations culminated in the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in 1972, at Stockholm, Sweden. The conference was attended by representatives from 113 countries [6]. This conference was instrumental in seriously injecting the “green” agenda into the public and political zeitgeist. In fact, this very conference resulted in many of the infamous bloated ministries and bureaucracies we know today that deal with “Environment and Heritage”. To top it off, we had the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as another outcome of this conference. Presiding over the conference was Maurice Strong who, like Julian Huxley, is a key figure in the politics behind "environmentalism". After the conference, Strong was appointed the first Director-General of UNEP.

 

The next significant accerlation point was the 1992 "Earth Summit" in Rio Di Janeiro, which was a re-hash of the 1972 Stockholm conference exactly 20 years earlier, with Maurice Strong again organising and presiding over the conference as Secretary-General. This summit is where anthropogenic global warming was first given concrete political legitimacy and the summit produced the "Framework Convention on Climate Change", a sort of convention for a convention, which still today guides the process of treaty-making with regard to emissions reductions. From this conference also came the nightmarish "Agenda 21", which is basically an anti-development, anti-progress bible that state and local governments worship in Australia and elsewhere. "Agenda 21" is the reason we are paying astronomical prices for land in Australia, despite the noted abundance of that very resource. "Agenda 21" has meant increased food, water and energy costs and decreased living standards for all Australians.

We are approaching the 20-year anniversary of the Rio "Earth Summit" and the 40-year anniversary of the Stockholm Conference, which will be in 2012. The UN kooks and totalitarians have already planned their new conference which they are calling "Rio+20" or "Earth Summit 2012". 2012 is of course when the old Kyoto Protocol runs out. No doubt they are planning some grand lunacy for the 2012 conference and Australians need to do everything they can to rid this country of the "green" disease before that time. We have, at least temporarily, avoided the catastrophe that was revealed in the Draft Copenhagen Treaty, which literally created a global eco-government that would tax Australians and control Australia's natural resources, but people have to keep talking about these things. We can't rely on spineless politicians, like Mr Abbott.

References

1. Quigley, Carroll. Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. 1966, New York: Macmillan.

2. http://www.trilateral.org/go.cfm?do=Page.View&pid=9#8 . Retrieved 27th July 2010.

3. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0006/000681/068197eo.pdf . Pg 11. Retrieved 27th July 2010.

4. http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/history/sixties/ . Retrieved 27th July 2010.

5. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0006/000681/068197eo.pdf . Pg 11. Retrieved 27th July 2010.

6. http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97 . Retrieved 27th July 2010.