Guest Post by Ryan Maue:
Starting Friday, April 15 in Washington DC, we will be able to witness an absolutely surreal public display of anti-capitalist, extreme far-left community organizing, all wrapped in the cloak of climate change / clean energy activism: The Power Shift Youth Climate Conference. Can we finally stipulate that there exists a well-organized nexus of scientists/politicians/organizations that wish to solve the “climate crisis”, and are using the issue as a political tool to further their leftist agenda? From the list of speakers, partners, and Workshop Titles, there is certainly no doubt about the motivations of this collection of greens. Arrogant, condescending scientists and politicians sneer at so-called anti-science, Big Oil Republicans and demand global warming adherence as a litmus test for elected office. Instead, advocate scientists and environmentalists should be continually questioned about their motivations prior to consideration of their extreme|draconian policy prescriptions. I’m getting really tired of their holier-than-thou-attitude.
After this, you will know the true meaning of the acronym of Win The Future.
Noel Sheppard at newsbusters.org provides a nice summary of the speaker line up, including EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, everyone’s (especially Glenn Beck’s) favorite communist and former Green Jobs Czar Van Jones, and, of course, Nobel Prize winner Al Gore! Keynote speaker list.
Perusing the program of this Youth Climate Conference should immediately disabuse you of all preconceived notions that climate change is not a political issue:
Plain and simple: Power Shift 2011 is a mission to recruit 10,000 youth leaders from every walk of life to be on the front lines in the fight for a clean energy future.
We are moving far beyond the pursuit of building a crowd for a weekend conference. Power Shift 2011 attendees – young faith leaders, entrepreneurs, student government leaders, social justice advocates and blue-collar workers – are signing up for the launch of critical, focused, and strategic campaign efforts in their communities.
“Our Power Shift 2011 “training boot camp” will yield 10,000 leaders, equipped with the game plans, tools, and strategies to WIN on the frontlines of every community across this country.”
Dr. James Hansen of NASA death trains/coal protesting infamy should like this workshop:
Is it too much to dream of an America where polluters are held accountable for their disasters? Is it too much to dream of an America where people aren’t burdened with the cost of pollution? Is it too much to dream of an America where citizens are in charge of our energy decisions, not big polluters? We don’t think so.
Then we will form two marches, one storming Capitol Hill to lobby and hold our elected leaders accountable, the other will march from one corporate polluter’s office to another and return to Lafeyette Park for a dance party.
Here are a list of other Workshop Titles: Link to many, many more
Sex and Sustainability
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Dirty Money, Chamberleaks, and how to win back Main Street
Ethical Solutions to Environmental Classism – Case Studies around the World
What would Jesus/Moses/The Buddha Drive? An Inter-Faith Discussion on Religious Environmental Activism
From the BP Oil Spill to the Japanese Nuclear Crisis: Why Capitalism is Killing the Planet:
Panelists
Finding the Billions for Clean Energy and Climate Justice Now!
Regulating Greenhouse Gases (GHGS) Under the Clean Air Act
Stop the Tar Sands Invasion
Climate Voices — The Human Rights of Climate Change
High School and Junior High Organizing
Exposing the Climate Denial Machine
What to do when the President’s just not that into you (program excerpt below)
Despite the hopes of millions that President Obama would champion clean energy and help solve the climate crisis, his response has fallen far short of what’s necessary. At best, his record and rhetoric have been mixed. At worst, he’s actively obstructed progress by boosting offshore drilling, recently announcing a huge expansion of coal mining on public lands, and financing environmentally destructive products overseas. President Obama has also treated the environmental movement, and especially the youth climate movement, with relative disdain: while there are many examples, the most visible was refusing to speak to the 2009 Powershift conference, and then attending a Washington Wizards basketball game just two blocks away. The panel will explore some key questions that have bedeviled our movement since Obama’s inauguration: What is President Obama’s climate/environment record? How should the climate movement deal with the White House? What can we learn from other movements’ response to the White House? Is there a possibility for a pro-environment, progressive challenger to Obama in the 2012 primaries? Is that a good idea? To answer these questions, and share inside knowledge, we’ll feature some of the brightest thinkers on climate politics and movements.
Next Steps for White Allies (program excerpt below)
“Now that you understand the importance of diversity and inclusion to the climate change movement, how do you practice being a strong white ally? For the most part, white folks have little opportunity to talk about race, racism or how to be an ally to people of color. Indeed, we are socialized to not notice or talk about such things. It can be lonely being a white ally.”
Shevva,
That quote is attributed to Winston Churchill. Look him up, he was once one of your (the UK’s) renowned (and hated) leaders. He has lots of good quotes you can do with a simple Google search.
You guys are pathetic. Everything you don’t like is socialist. This blog is so far-right and not does even come close to representing the mainstream opinions of Americans. I’m a centrist and I support clean energy. Fossil fuels get 12 times the subsidies that renewables get, 12 times! I say reduce fossil subsidies to a 6th of that, double investment in greentech and cut the rest of the spending. That’s an entirely reasonable approach to take. It cuts spending to please the Right and it supports the new energy economy to please the Left.
The only reason this likely won’t work is because Republican/Blue Dog Democratic politicians are in bed with the fossil industry. Republicans are harping on spending cuts, but won’t touch fossil subsidies. This negates all of their arguments in favor of cutting spending and shows that they are blatant hypocrites.
This is NOT a science blog, it’s a right-wing political blog and it’s quite obvious.
The best term for them I’ve learned on this blog – Watermelons.
Brian,
This isn’t a ‘right wing’ site, and it is not a political blog. There are constant comments here from folks left of center who are outraged at the perversion of science by corrupt scientists.
You might think about where you’re coming from.
@Brian
And you’re being hypocritical just calling out conservatives. Both sides are hypocritical when it meets their ends. I’m all for cutting fossil fuel subsidies, but don’t believe we can guarantee that the cash would then go to energy research. It would just be used for someone’s pork project. Also, if you do the math, cutting fossil fuel subsidies will not make wind or solar any more competitive. Even with their existing subsidies which should also be eliminated.
Brian, very few people who frequent this blog are against clean energy just for the sake of being against clean energy. Most if not all here are proponents of nuclear energy, hydroelectric energy, geothermal energy. The problem is that the defacto “Clean Energy” as the greens define it is only wind and solar which are terribly inefficient by any measuere in relation to fossil fuel. I would love to see all energy subsidies removed and let the free market and free flow of investment determine the winners. Fossils rule the day becuase they work and they are cheap and despite hysterical claims to the contrary, there is still a lot of it around. It will run out some day, provided we can’t develop affordable synthetics (which I think we can) but solar and wind are not the answer to the base load requirements of a modern nation. They can be part, but barring some fundamental revolution in efficiency and storage capacity, they will not be a major part, of the solution.
It’s pathetically ironic that well-meaning young people are being manipulated through this type of “movement” by the Svengalis of international finance.
“Is it too much to dream of an America where citizens are in charge of our energy decisions, not big polluters? We don’t think so.”
The big polluters should make a decision and cut off all these people from services. Start with Al Gore and James Hansen and Lisa jackson. Then get every name from those attending and refuse to sell them gas and electricity. After all these people are trying to put them out of business, why do business from them.
You will find that most who side with the ‘conservative’ side are actually libertarians at heart; do you know why that is?
.
@Pull My Finger “The problem is that the defacto “Clean Energy” as the greens define it is only wind and solar…”
That is very incorrect. “Greens” consider geothermal, tidal, kinetic, biofuel, and many still consider nuclear as “Clean Energy.” Wind and solar just happen to be very popular and promising technologies. The research and development being done for solar is pretty incredible. It’s an exciting time for greentech in general.
Anthony Watts said,
REPLY: “You are displaying your ignorance of history. Read the Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes.”
Oh puhleeze. That’s not history, just one woman’s interpretation of it, and that woman has an agenda. – Anthony
I suspect that you are dismissing it because you have the opposite political viewpoint, not because of any evidence you have that her facts are wrong.
[snip – leave the “denying” part out and rewrite it, I really get tired of your constant denigration of others using that term. Just stop it. Next time you use the term or any variation its strike #3 for you. – Anthony]
Rather than depositing some sort of blanket political statement about this blog, why don’t you respond to some of the specific content found in the posted article. For instance, if it’s truly just a march for climate change, why are so many topics in the conference focused on “social justice” (i.e., forced wealth redistribution), anti-capitalism, and racism.
If you truly are a centrist, as you claim, it’s time you took your blinders off. You also might experiment with citing some sources when throwing out specific numbers like Fossil fuels get 12 times the subsidies that renewables get, 12 times! Especially when throwing in exclamation points willy nilly.
Brian,
Natural gas used to be promoted by the enviro-lobby as “clean energy” when it provided one twentieth of the power it provides today. That was only back in 2002. But now natural gas is being demonized.
If you try to look at what’s happening objectively, you will begin to understand that the Greens’ eco-lobby is attacking Western civilization, not certain types of energy. “Environmentalism” is only a means to that end, and the lure of the redistribution of the West’s wealth is used to buy UN-member votes.
The Green rank-and-file chumps can’t see the forest for the trees. If they’re successful, they’ll never understand how or why they ended up in the gulag.
#
#
PRD says:
April 14, 2011 at 8:04 am
Shevva,
That quote is attributed to Winston Churchill. Look him up, he was once one of your (the UK’s) renowned (and hated) leaders. He has lots of good quotes you can do with a simple Google search.
Cheers PRD learn something new every day History wasn’t my thing at school double science, math’s the only subjects i could be bothered with.
“the Greens’ eco-lobby is attacking Western civilization, not certain types of energy. “Environmentalism” is only a means to that end, and the lure of the redistribution of the West’s wealth is used to buy UN-member votes.”
Natural gas is likely likely cleaner than coal/oil, but it still has quite a footprint.
So you’re suggesting that environmentalists don’t really care about the health of people and our ecosystems, they just want to manipulate the UN?
That sounds like a conspiracy theory.
“Attacking Western civilization”? That’s a bit much. 🙂
Are ya’ll really bagging on a bunch of young people who are pushing for a better future?
Come on guys . . . chill out a little. You’re like hyenas.
REPLY: I suggest you attend, then with that experience there, and the experience here, tell us who better fits that definition. – Anthony
Is it a coincidence that if you combine green from the environmental movement with the red of communism, that you wind up with the brown of fascism?
Brian said:
“Fossil fuels get 12 times the subsidies that renewables get, 12 times! I say reduce fossil subsidies to a 6th of that, double investment in greentech and cut the rest of the spending.”
Brian,
It’s a matter of scale. I don’t have the data on hand, but if the dollars per unit of energy is used, your 12x figure becomes, shall we say, ridiculous?
Niko says:
April 14, 2011 at 3:43 pm
“Are ya’ll really bagging on a bunch of young people who are pushing for a better future? Come on guys . . . chill out a little. You’re like hyenas.”
===========================
That is a big fat red herring, Niko.
No fool [or hyena….which by the way is another red herring within a red herring…given that hyenas do what they do] would ever argue that we don’t want a better future for our children.
But many “youth movements” were started with good intentions…and then they quickly degraded to well….unspeakable horrors. [I don’t need to show you any examples…they are front and center in human history to date.]
Not that this one is the same, however.
But the similarity is there and both foundations are fatally flawed.
Don’t resort to lame smokescreens, dude.
We are not “bagging the young people for wanting a better future.”
Nonsense.
We are bagging the twisted ideological flaw behind it!
Come to think of it, it “bags” itself.
Groupthink Disorder is going to kill our species altogether if we are not careful…you know survival of the fittest.
You can believe whatever you want, Niko, but don’t conflate the issues here.
Everyone wants a better world.
But there are many forces at work that would take advantage of that ideal.
So, watch out!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Imagine the hate and bitterness .. it’ll will flow like the Hudson at this conference.
Check out http://www.green-agenda.com for an excellent roundup of what the Greens stand for
Shevva and PRD;
Nope.
Snopes has the original, from Margaret Thatcher in Question Period in Parliament:
eadler says:
April 14, 2011 at 1:03 am
Douglas says:
April 13, 2011 at 2:57 pm
[You are displaying your ignorance of history. Read the Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes.
Here is an article which explains the two sentences I wrote in more detail. The right wing think tanks, financed by the energy industry, employed two ex scientists, turned political ideologues, to use their scientific prestige to discredit the idea that sulfur pollution was a health problem which needed to be regulated, and subsequently turned their efforts to discrediting the idea that GHG’s would cause global warming. This began the political polarization of the science of Climatology, that has become more intense as the centrists are driven out of the Republican Party.]
—————————————————————–
Eadler. Like I said –Talk about confused disconnected ideas!
Douglas
Anthony said,
[snip – leave the “denying” part out and rewrite it, I really get tired of your constant denigration of others using that term. Just stop it. Next time you use the term or any variation its strike #3 for you. – Anthony]
The facts are that the Marshall Institute, founded by Nierenberg, Seitz and Jastrow,in the late 1980’s, opposed all government regulation on ideological grounds. They believed in free markets. In order to fight regulation of cigarettes, sulfate pollution of the air, CFC’s and emission of greenhouse gases, they adopted the tactic of disputing the science, rather than making the case for free market ideology, which they couldn’t win with the general public. They eventually lost the battle on cigarettes, sulfate pollution and CFC’s as action was taken on all 3. The free market solution of cap and trade was used successfully to fix sulfate pollution in the US.
The same right wing think tanks are still battling efforts to reduce greenhouse gase emissions, and have enlisted the forces of like minded scientists with a right wing conservative philosophy. Their propaganda to date has been successful in this area, and they have persuaded a lot of political conservatives that AGW is not happening. Even the self styled Republican maverick, John McCain has changed his position on AGW as a result of political pressure from the Republican right.
Kerry Emanual who is a real scientist and a Republican, is appalled by the politicization of the science, and won’t vote for any politician who doesn’t accept the scientific consensus that humans are changing the climate of the planet in a harmful way. Unfortunately I can’t quote what he says directly, because he uses the dreaded D-word.
eadler says:
“The same right wing think tanks are still battling efforts to reduce greenhouse gase emissions, and have enlisted the forces of like minded scientists with a right wing conservative philosophy. Their propaganda to date has been successful in this area, and they have persuaded a lot of political conservatives that AGW is not happening. ”
Aside from the demonstrable fact that there is zero evidence that AGW is happening, Adler accuses his un-named “right wing think tanks” of “propaganda.” That is pure projection.
What Adler refers to as ‘right wing’ is simply the original Constitution and Bill of Rights. Compare that with the Leftist totalitarian Green dictator wannabes, and it becomes clear that “right wing” = those believing in the U.S. Constitution. That terrifies the dispicable Left, which is trying to destroy everything that has made America great.
Reverting to the original U.S. Constitution would cure about 99.8% of everything that has gone wrong in this great country. That explains why Adler is attempting to demonize the Constitutional principles that have made our country such a tremendous success. Adler advocates the policies of socialistic failure, but it is an indisputable fact that the more socialist any country is, the worse off its citizens are. You can start with comparing North Korea vs South Korea.
The choice is green totalitarianism, or freedom. Take your pick.
You seem to have your own ideologies and plenty of bitterness towards a movement in favor of a cleaner and more sustainable world. Give it a rest already.
I think clean energy has done a lot to get young people excited about science/technology. Greentech and web development seem to be the hottest fields right now. I commend them for rallying around something they feel strongly about.