An interesting essay written by “Zombie” of Zombietime fame has a climate change component worth noting. I don’t agree with all of it, but it does explain some behavior we have seen in the past decade.
“Zombie” writes:
I recently wrote an essay called “Progressive Racism: The Hidden Motive Driving Modern Politics”, and in the essay I had a section about “climate change” with a thesis you might find intriguing.
CLIMATE CHANGE
- Progressive position:
- Institute a variety of penalties, taxes and incentives all designed to discourage production and use of carbon-derived energy by industrialized nations.
- False public rationale offered by progressives to justify their position:
- This is not a political position: it’s simply a scientific fact that if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels then the resulting greenhouse gases will render the planet uninhabitable.
- Conservatives’ inaccurate theory of progressives’ real intent:
- This so-called “crisis” is just the latest in a long series of fabricated environmental pseudo-crises not based on fact but on an irrational Luddite loathing of civilization; your wildly exaggerated hysteria about “global warming” is merely a mechanism to manipulate and control the citizenry and cripple the economy.
|
Viewed globally, the real long-term consequence of all the “climate change”-related policy proposals is to transfer massive amounts of wealth from the First World developed nations to the Third World underdeveloped nations, while simultaneously crippling the ability of the developed world to maintain its economic dominance.
What could motivate this seemingly suicidal economic policy by First-World progressives? In a word: Guilt. Specifically, “white guilt” by Europeans (and those descended from Europeans) for having unfairly exploited backward regions and non-white peoples over the last few centuries to establish white economic hegemony over the rest of the world.
This rationale is openly discussed at the annual United Nations Climate Change Conferences, where representatives of Third World nations demand payback and reparations for colonialist exploitation, and where the descendants of those colonialists grovel in abject apology for the wrongdoings of their ancestors.
But deeply embedded in those apologies and guilt is a racism that far surpasses even the naive racism of yesteryear.
If you enter into competition with a rival you deem approximately equal in skill to yourself, and then you win fair and square, then it would never occur to you to apologize for winning nor would you feel guilty about it — because it was a fair fight. On the other hand, if you compete against and then easily defeat an opponent whose very nature you believe makes them inescapably inferior to you — for example, getting in a fistfight with a small child — then afterwards you might very well feel guilty and apologize for taking advantage of a lesser opponent who had no chance against you due to their inherent inadequacy.
So when a modern progressive apologizes for his ancestors’ past colonialist dominance, he is really saying: “I’m so sorry that we smart organized aggressive white people took advantage of you lesser peoples whose inherent cultural and intellectual shortcomings made you incapable of fending us off: it wasn’t a fair fight, and I apologize.”
In other words: Apologizing is an unconscious backhanded way of declaring your innate superiority.
If these modern progressives felt that their ancestors had achieved global dominance by defeating rivals of equal stature, then there’d be nothing to feel guilty about, and thus no need to pay reparations and hence no need to devise the “climate change” crisis and attendant suicidal economic policies.
Full essay here:
http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2014/03/10/progressive-racism-the-hidden-motive-driving-modern-politics/
David, UK says:
March 22, 2014 at 2:44 pm
Gary Pearse says:
March 22, 2014 at 2:29 pm
“I believe the UN, is: (something like) “You can give a hungry man a fish a day or you can teach him how to fish so he can feed himself each day.” Teach him how to fish!!! When I first heard that piece of hubris, I was amazed at its blatant racism. Yeah, it’s there.
(from David, UK)
You think that phrase is from the UN? WTF!
It’s actually an ancient Chinese proverb.
Still worked up over its “blatant racism”? Sheesh.”
Thanks David, I stand corrected on the source (an historical Chinese elite) but not the nitty gritty of my comment. If you were to say “Let them eat cake” to starving citizens, it wouldn’t exonerate you from disgrace because Marie Antoinette said it first.
José Tomás is right when he says:
March 22, 2014 at 10:39 am
“The real problem is that we in the “Thirld World” need that the “First World” to succeed. In a globalized economy, your success is our success.”
and especially so, when he adds:
“This guilt / shame thinking / behavior is infantile and the net result is more poverty to “non-western” populations.”
Together we win, and apart we lose. Conflict is the path to failure as the Second World War showed. CAGW belief and consequent action is extremely infantile.
Zombie needs to read up on the UN’s Agenda 21. The Green Agenda (green agenda.com) covers its content.
All of the climate change propaganda is designed to support the goals set forth by this long-term plan. It has nothing to do with guilt of any kind. It’s a socialist agenda designed by those who want a one-world government, which is the basic goal and reason for setting up the UN in the first place back in 1946.
They want to siphon funds from the First World Countries to the Third World with the specific aim of stunting and preventing Third World development. The governments of the Third World countries would not be motivated to use the funds to develop or improve the plight of their own people as, if they did so, the future money flow would dry up. Instead, the incentive would be to make the plight of the people worse in order to request ever more funding. The goal is to create nanny nations dependent of the UN teat.
I suspect that ‘guilt’ plays some role in motivating the ‘useful idiots’ but not in the leadership caste. THEY are all about power and moving the power nodes from those who currently control them (the nodes) to themselves, the leadership caste.
>I disagree. There are two ways to not “fight fair” – one is by fighting someone inferior to you like a small child, the other is by fighting someone who is your equal but with an unfair advantage of weapons, or deception by breaking promises, etc. By
But they not equal because one side is outgunning the other!
You assuming equal intelligence here and that is much a moot point.
The difference here one side make the efforts to build those weapons or learning how to deceive you. The fact that the west had more technology to win say some war begs the question as to this fact still makes the one side superior. We not talking smarts or morals. The fact of using institutions to educate people does not mean the loosing side had worse brains and the winning side had better brains. However a well organized society with education will beat the pants off of an ignorant and un-educated society.
So being superior is being superior and that quite much the end of it. If I have better guns then you then I am superior. We can get into a honest war and I will beat the pants off you. This begs the question how come you did not organize and get those better guns?
Your position and point changes little here.
If one side becomes wealthy – the other side will MOST certainly like and promote ideas to make you feel guilty.
Much of this essay is wrong. Developed nations like climate change policies as a way to keep developing nations DOWN through energy deprivation (no loans for coal fired power stations for example). Developing nations like climate change policies because they wrongly think they will get money for nothing. There is always a price to pay.
The guilt, which I used to believe in, is not really there. Their aim is even worse than the slave traders and colonialists. They want to drastically reduce the population of developing nations. Please don’t believe a word I have to say.
See here and here.
3×2 says:
March 22, 2014 at 12:57 pm
“Could you break that s##t down into some English language version that we can all share?”
Consequence of redistribution / subsidation: Reward failure and you get more of it.
I’m not saying let poor people starve, but maybe put a work requirement in welfare, that would be a start.
ntesdorf says:
March 22, 2014 at 3:16 pm
“Together we win, and apart we lose. Conflict is the path to failure as the Second World War showed. CAGW belief and consequent action is extremely infantile.”
America didn’t lose; America won the Empire. Violence can be extremely profitable, that’s why people are violent.
I have noticed a common theme in the progressive righteousness. Never use your own money or time to do good, always use someone else’s. I have yet to see a tatooed, nose-pierced, banner waving “activist” serving in a soup kitchen. They are invariably run by rather conservative people who perform deeds rather than words; do rather than feel. The AGWers want YOU to do something while THEY pontificate.
If ever we really are faced with a crisis where survival will be of the fittest the conservative types will be around long after the feel gooders have departed.
Gary Pearse says:
March 22, 2014 at 3:16 pm
“If you were to say “Let them eat cake” to starving citizens, it wouldn’t exonerate you from disgrace because Marie Antoinette said it first.”
You mean, telling a man how to become self-sufficient – which is the meaning of “teach him how to fish” – is mean and nasty? BTW, it was “Let them eat brioche”; and it was probably not Marie Antoinette but some 6 year old aristocrat daughter who said it; Marie Antoinette got killed by the enlightened noble socialists anyway, but then, they also killed each other, so fair’s fair.
Here is an example of the “white guilt” which I see above. There is so much guilt that this is the result.
What a great deal! The natives are ecstatic with joy!
How is this an action of guilt? What next, oil fired power stations? Gas?
PS I have said it before and I’ll say it again – massive deforestation will be the end result.
Here is another example of guilt from the EBRD
Since using wood pellet at Drax (UK) is OK I suppose developing countries will now turn their lush forests into wood pellets. It’s a win win situation dontcha know. 🙂
Jimbo says:
March 22, 2014 at 4:22 pm
The fake environmentalism of Watermelons is sickening. Forests must be chopped down, chipped & burned, & birds & bats must be massacred by windmills & fried by PVC farms to save the earth!
Climate change policies are not just about the developing world or reparations. I don’t want to dump a whole tonne of references here but some Germans have started stealing wood from forests for heating due to the high cost of power. People are dying in the UK and other countries due to high energy bills. Food to fuel is not helping to dampen food prices. Germany’s heavy industry is sweating buckets due to high energy bills. All driven by climate change policies. So even if “their ancestors had achieved global dominance by defeating rivals of equal stature” these people would still be screaming for action. It’s not so much about guilt of the past and more about guilt of the present. (iPads, nice homes, a sense of purpose, needing to feel important, something to do, nice 4×4 cars etc.) Focus here.
Prince Charles
Hollywood elite
Middle class kids with little drive or imagination
etc. etc.
All these people would go postal if you ever deprived them of energy. Absolutely postal.
Jimbo says:
March 22, 2014 at 4:34 pm
“All these people would go postal if you ever deprived them of energy. Absolutely postal.”
===============
That takes planning.
Anti DDT campaigns are a good example of guilt I suppose. The author of this piece needs to extend his thinking here I think. It was driven by progressives.
IMHO there are generally two types of progressive. The powerful and the less powerful. The less powerful progressives are naive, generally well meaning useful idiots. The powerful progressives are usually closet eco-fascists.
Jimbo says:
March 22, 2014 at 4:34 pm
If Apple board member Al Gore & CEO Tim Cook want to reduce everyone else’s carbon footprint (but not their own) so much, why then does the latest version of iOS 7 drain my iPhone battery so rapidly? I guess I should be happy that it doesn’t make batteries swell up like Samsung Galaxy S4’s. Maybe better batteries would have been developed if so much had not been wasted on CACA modeling & subsidizing windmills.
Here are the results of the guilt. And this isn’t even the developing world!!! Is this driven by guilt?
The long and short of my comments is this – white guilt for past actions / reparations is not what is driving the CAGW con job. Just like co2 it is simply an excuse to drive their ‘hidden’ agendas. De-industrialization for EVERYONE leading to global population reduction (but not them or their families and friends). That is their guilt.
Sorry for being such a cynic.
Jimbo says:
March 22, 2014 at 4:54 pm
“Sorry for being such a cynic.”
=================
I’m kinda afraid to release my cynicism, you seem to be doing pretty well.
Not far off the mark, but still too devious. The contribution of ‘white guilt’ is that it motivates those with more money that they actually need to live (the better-off-than-average Leftists) to adopt Progressive policies for redistribution of wealth to ease their guilt.
The fatal flaw of the concept of ‘redistribution of wealth’ is that, be design, it reduces the resources available to people who can manage them productively by giving them to people who cannot manage them productively and will only waste them.
After the end of the Cold War there was a lost purpose for many people. I mentioned above about the need for some people to have a feeling of doing something, having a purpose or being important. What were the people protesting on Greenham Common to do when the Americans packed up?
There was a quote from someone involved in this CAGW con job about the aim of a massive re-distribution of wealth. How can this happen when the US and China won’t allow it? It’s a silly dream, naive thinking, nuts. It will end in tears so please, please don’t worry about this. It’s not going to happen because elections will be lost in the US and China won’t even enter the pitch. European politicians are not yet completely mad and want to get elected too.
Sorry for my cynicism but this essay misses the mark.
Bert Walker says:
March 22, 2014 at 3:00 pm
“On the principle of infallibility there rests the iron discipline of the Communist (Progressive) Party.
=============
This is the same mechanism Cults use to maintain control of their followers. Unfortunately many children are taught to blindly follow their parents. This obedience training is then exploited to control the new adult when they leave home.
Cults exploit this by quickly weeding out individuals that will not blindly follow the leader. They then isolate the new recruits, so that they only hear the message from the infallible “god head” of the cult. The Supreme Leader.
Now look around and think of how many organizations operate in this fashion.
The panic amongst Warmists is very simple to understand. Global surface temps have ground to a halt for over 16 years (despite what the IPCC promised). Warmists thought that the setting up of carbon controlling institutions and regulations as well as the global alternative energy infrastructure would be much farther ahead than they are today. A continued temp standstill or declining temps would ruin their plans and it is. This has nothing to do with guilt and everything to do with green ideology, de-industrialization and the need to feel important. Co2, rising sea levels, Greenland meltdown, ocean acidification, coral reefs etc. are all a means to an end.
This is interesting, but hardly novel. I think that many readers would have explored this aspect to various depths.
Do remember that there has been much side tracking by those concerned with delivering the message.
In good science, the name of the game is to DELIVER THE GOODS.
Putting a person on the moon is delivering the goods. Writing a story about it is delivering the message.
Goods delivery is a more satisfying arena in which to work. Earn your keep by providing to society more than you ever take out. You can’t really do that well with theoretical words in essays.