From Climate Change dispatch, by Kerry Jackson
Generally speaking, the first person in a debate who compares their opponent to Hitler or the Nazis at that moment loses the argument.
When the Third Reich is invoked, it’s usually clear evidence that that person’s position is so weak that they have had to resort to a gross misrepresentation of the other’s position.
There are exceptions, of course, because sometimes the Nazi label fittingly applies. Sometimes the lineage of a movement, institution, or political figure can be traced right back to the German fascist regime.
This is the case with today’s environmentalism, according to a one-time British investment banker.
“If you look at what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s, in their environmental policies, virtually every theme you see in the modern environmental movement, the Nazis were doing,” said Rupert Darwall, author of “Green Tyranny,” in a recent interview with Encounter Books.
“I think actually the most extraordinary thing that I came across was this quote from Adolf Hitler where he told an aide once, ‘I’m not interested in politics. I’m interested in changing people’s lifestyles.’ Well, that could be … that’s extraordinarily contemporary. That is what the modern environmental movement is all about. It’s about changing people’s lifestyles,” said Darwall, who is no crackpot on the fringe and whose background includes duties as a special advisor to the United Kingdom’s Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The Fuhrer’s interest in “changing people’s lifestyles” is, not at all shockingly, similar to the goals of today’s climate fanatics who want to destroy capitalism and replace it with an economic system — run by them, naturally — that would certainly change lifestyles in the West.
Darwall further notes in the interview that “the Nazis were the first political party in the world to have a wind power program,” and were also opposed to eating meat, a delightful and nutritious activity that the warming alarmists consider a sin.
Read the full report here
The book: Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex
is available on Amazon. Click image for more:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I often wonder why so many of the “Warmians” have German names.
Mann, Schmidt, Rahmstorf, Stieg, Hansen, Schneider.
Hansen is a Danish name, but close enough.
No surprises here
In my opinion, elitist intellectuals have always had totalitarian, top-down government control dreams.
From Plato’s Republic, on down. Just as Darwin came up with a science-y explanation that could allow the intellectuals to get rid of God, they were already there, intellectually, and so had an appetite for Darwin’s ideas.
They already had been dealing with the pesky problem of The Poor for a while, as society boosted productivity, encouraging people to drift to urban areas, and as religion had its monopoly on charity taken away, little by little, by government. Our leading thinkers in the nature of man – Locke, Rousseau, etc., were prompted by the debates of what to do with ne’er-do-well begger-thiefs, and their women, having babies they could not financially take care of.
Hitler was just another stripe of elitist totalitarian, but one who actually accomplished more than publishing his views.
Mr. Darwell is quite brave.
Thanks for posting this.
I look forward to buying a copy and reading it.
The True Face of Fascism is Socialist Big Government Not Conservative Small Government
If you read nothing more than this sentence of the article, the common denominator of almost all self-inflicted humanitarian atrocities requires a strong centralized Government that doesn’t respect human rights. Without a strong central government, there would have been no Holocaust, no Holodomor, Killing Fields, Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution, North Korean continued mass starvation, … Continue reading
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/12/10/the-true-face-of-fascism/
+1. But small government needs a strong army and foreign policy not to become nonexistent government.
Yep…unlerss you have America as your neighbor. Just look at Canada. They don’t spend anything on military and direct it all towards social services…and their healthcare is still worse than our VA….and that isn’t saying much.
Canada has a small government?
“and their healthcare is still worse than our VA”
I spent a couple of weeks in a VA hospital a few months ago, and could not have been treated better. I don’t know if Trump had anything to do with the good service, but I was very pleased with the treatment I got from the VA employees.
Frankly, I don’t think Gaia Worshipping Malthusian EcoWarriors are like a certain historical group from Germany.
They are a brand new species of despicable noxious scum, mutating from a mélange of disproven and evil concepts from past centuries and carrying a brand new sort of deadly virus. In the mélange is not just the two evils of the twentieth century but the defeated evil of the nineteenth century (slavery) and the slumbering evil of the eighteenth century (extreme radicalism – i.e. Robespierre) mixed with Malthusian loathing of humanity in general.
Why is it that every new century brings some new evil?
The point was comparing their methods, not comparing individuals.
I watched an interview of Rupert Darwal on C-SPAN’s BookTV channel and was very impressed by his indisputable knowledge of the subject, his erudition and his obvious intelligence. On that basis alone, I recommend reading the book.
I requested a copy of Darwall’s book from my local public library. Naturally, given my residence in the Sovereign Socialist People’s Republic of ________, that library branch didn’t have a copy. They sought to locate a copy via the inter-library loan system (which is supposed to include all university-level educational institutions and other public libraries in said Sovereign Socialist People’s Republic).
Apparently, there is not a single copy residing anywhere in the Sovereign Socialist People’s Republic. Quelle surprise !!
There are always people and groups of people that crave power and control over the masses. The labels attached to such tyranny doesn’t matter. It is the methods used to herd the “sheople” that matter and that they have in common.
None of those methods result in freedoms for the “sheople”.
If you don’t understand your enemy, then you have lost before the battle has begun.
If you see people as enemies because they disagree with you, you have lost what winning a battle can’t replace.
‘The Climate Industrial Complex’
+1
Kerry Jackson says, “Darwall further notes in the interview that “the Nazis were the first political party in the world to have a wind power program,” and were also opposed to eating meat, a delightful and nutritious activity that the warming alarmists consider a sin.”
Seriously, are you apologizing for Nazi’s? That’s just not cool….
After some consideration… I don’t think the current environmentalism has “roots” in Nazism, but rather, it is the same mindset.
Little wonder history repeats.
i like this aphorism better:
history doesn’t repeat itself. it rhymes, tho.
This is silly.
What made nazis awful was not their paganism, obsession for purity, and all those things that greens share with them. It wasn’t their goal.
What made them awful was there willingness to use whatever it took, including brutal violence, to achieve these goals.
Most greens wont do that, and reject violence. Lots of them DO talk, a lot, about humans being as bad for the planet as Untermenschen were said to be for Germany, but they don’t act accordingly as nazis did. They are willing to use State violence to force other into their ways, but no more and no less that any political force, so they are no better for sure, but no worse either
The vast majority of German’s weren’t brutal monsters either.
The fact remains that the environmental movement as a whole is willing to use these methods to achieve their ends, even if some of the shock troops haven’t fully bought in.
OK, Mark W, give me a couple of concrete examples of using “these methods to achieve their ends”. I want to know if you’re serious.
scraft is right, they won’t camp us. As No pressure 10:10 shows, they just liked to see some blood, in a comical way. It is only that status quo keeps this way as long as they don’t start believing in 50 million climate refugees and all other lies they spread.
Just look at what they say they want to do, once they get the power to do it.
Guilt by association. We don’t approve or like it when the warmists do it to us, so please don’t do it to others. I am a vegetarian for ethical reasons, but I assure you it had zip to do with H*tler. Why so many skeptics keep on taking potshots at people like me (also a skeptic) is beyond my understanding. An ethical vegetarian HAS to oppose warming alarmism because of the bird and bat slicing turbines and the torture birds to death solar thermal plants. And also because CO2 is plant food and creates food growth for humans and wildlife. WE are the real environmentalists, we skeptics. So please, please stop shooting our movement in the foot with anti-environment, anti-vegetarian nonsense.
The inspiration of the CAGW propaganda
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KRrOhjB4mC4/UiDxu_LU7RI/AAAAAAAAIOs/fqKbBP4mFoA/s400/Why-people-believe.jpg
OK, I’ll bite. Who says that, and with what evidence?
I suspect it really depends very much on the audience and the arena. If it happens on Facebook or Twitter or at The Guardian you might get called such things for simply, say, supporting some of the policies of the current US President. The person insulting you may receive thunderous applause from the gallery, and your reply may be deleted or not published at all even if it is truthful/correct. Is that really a win?
(side comment:
I understand why my comment above, re-quoting the article, went straight into moderation, but it must make a lot of extra work for the moderators with articles like this. When the topic and article itself contains key words which trigger auto-moderation is there no way of preempting the problem with the software currently in use (Is it WordPress? Someday I might start a blog of some sort and it is interesting to know these sort of things in advance).)
[Life happens. Then you die. 8<) True, political and hysteresis-evoking-emotional threads are the most difficult. We'll manage.
But please, do leave the square [] brackets for us. It's how we tell the outside world what has been cut, pruned, twinned, or corrected. .mod]
“Who says that, and with what evidence?”
One of those everybody-knows things. See also Godwin’s Law, practically as old as the internet, so I won’t repeat it here. Two parts to it, first the high probability of someone saying it, second the high probability that the discussion then jumps the tracks, ending the original discussion. Everybody loses.
The climate consensus triggered Godwin’s law decades ago when they chose to call skeptics “deniers”.
Good work in the last few posts. The trick that Nazis did was to raise the importance of “the cause” above everything else. This is similar for many tyrants and the green movement bears similarities in placing nature above humans. Pol Pot had much the same philosophy as die hard greens. Once the general public accept “the cause” above all else then all manner of atrocities against humans become possible. Good societies tend to protect their individuals of every kind above everything else.
“Darwall further notes in the interview that “the Nazis were the first political party in the world to have a wind power program,” and were also opposed to eating meat, a delightful and nutritious activity that the warming alarmists consider a sin.”
Where did all the Nzis go after WWII?
I think they disappeared in a political sense. But totalitarianism did not disappear, it grew well under communists. I do think totalitarianism is being watched for, but it grows behind your back. Putin is an example. He just turned the ruins of the Soviet Union into a new dictatorship. And Russians, never been able (in several senses) to vote, are again restricted to one option.
“Nazi tactics” are the wrong words to use. “Extremeist tactics” are better, employed by both the extreme left and the extreme right.
But as a check: did leftist or right regimes murder most people during the 20th century?
Answer: Leftists by a country mile. (Think Stalin plus Mao plus Pot)
I would add the names Kim, Chavez and Maduro to that list as the most resent.
What does “Left” mean?
What does “Right” mean?
These terms, even when applied to the past, but especially an attempt to apply them to today’s political environment, are worse than useless.
The terms are deliberately twisted and merged, made to mean anything, to justify any action.
We’ve always been at war with ______________. (Oceania/Syria/Eastasia/Iraq/Eurasia…..)
The struggle has two sides: Freedom/individualism/free enterprise is one side. The other side is slavery/communitarianism/planned economy is the other.
The dichotomy of Right/Left is false.
Everything about the major players on both sides in the European war was AGAINST the American way of Freedom/individualism/free enterprise–both the USSR and Germany were FOR slavery/communitarianism/planned economy.
In fact, after America was dragged into the European war, we supported the most heinous of the slavery/communitarianism/planned economy sides–the USSR. Before and after WW2, the USSR slaughtered, by several multiples, millions of more innocents than H*tler’s wildest dreams.
ALL the democides in the 20th century were carried out by regimes based on slavery/communitarianism/planned economy.
Right vs Left has no meaning.
I would make the argument that there is a difference in what Conservative means to other countries as to that of the USA. Conservative in general means to preserve. So in a European country it would mean to preserve what it once was like a Monarchy and pre-European Union. Where in the USA it would be like our Constitution created it to be, with limited federal government and more power to the people and their State’s.
Left has always been Socialist as Hagel and Marx and Mussolini defined them. Just as you pointed out. And Right also as you pointed out in the USA but not in other countries. But…in the USA it is hard to separate the Democratic Party from what the Republican Party has been doing lately.
“I would make the argument that there is a difference in what Conservative means to other countries as to that of the USA. Conservative in general means to preserve. So in a European country it would mean to preserve what it once was like a Monarchy and pre-European Union. Where in the USA it would be like our Constitution created it to be, with limited federal government and more power to the people and their State’s.
“Left has always been Socialist as Hagel and Marx and Mussolini defined them. Just as you pointed out. And Right also as you pointed out in the USA but not in other countries. But…in the USA it is hard to separate the Democratic Party from what the Republican Party has been doing lately.”
Well, you don’t even want to get started on the meaninglessness of “Conservative” and “Liberal.” Neither of those have any meaning at all now.
“Left” does NOT equate to “Socialist,” especially in the USA.
Crony Capitalist Globalist Internationalists describe BOTH political parties in the USA.
The core belief system of the Politically Correct Progressive Party (still using “Democrat”) is hatred for Normal-America. They express this overtly and loudly.
The Republicans, on the other hand, flaunt “patriotism,” but their actions are much different from their words.
The Establishment Republicans share the PC disdain for Normals.
Both Parties accept the hybrid, crony-based quasi-free enterprise economic system that awards spoils to their favorite cronies.
Both are all-in on war-forever-in-the-middle-east.
Both, more or less, are just fine with massive regulations and control that the AGW “carbon trading” schemes introduce.
Republicans are more likely to publicly voice skepticism about the whole scheme, but that’s mostly just for the schmucks back home who vote them in. Once they’re in DC, they get a piece of the crony action, and they’re off to the races!
Left vs Right?
Conservative vs Liberal?
Republican vs Democrat?
Precious little meaning to any of those dichotomies. Precious little difference.
Trump appeared to be an exception–an anti-Establishment friend of Normals . And that is why he was elected. In office, however, he’s morphed into more of an Establishment crony. Not quite, but not as advertised, either.
I see what you did there. There is a world of difference between Left and Right, and they have completely different histories. The problem is that there are fewer and fewer individuals who will execute their campaign promises once they get into office. Either they say one thing, and then go native on the Hill, or they are not saying what they are really doing.
We see many examples of this in the Wikileaks emails. HRC fully supported TTP and open borders when giving 2-hundred-thousand-dollar-speeches to the Banks..Whereas Pres. Trump actually brought up bad trade deals, which Paul Ryan(R) was fast tracking for the Democrats, and then promptly withdrew from TTP as soon as elected.
The crisis is in the lack of integrity in individuals. There is hardly any politician who falls outside of those two categories. But if any one does what he actually says when running for office, then government of the people, by the people, and for the people will not perish.
Zeke,
“There is a world of difference between Left and Right, and they have completely different histories.”
Perceived history does not matter. It’s constantly changed and rearranged for current purposes.
Eg: Prior to FDR entering WW2 to help the Brits and Stalin, “Conservative” would have meant that we stuck to the constitution and did not meddle in foreign intrigues. In 2018, the belief system of the most prevalent flavor of “Conservativism” is totally based on the exact opposite–that America MUST intervene anywhere, any time, anyhow, with any force for…..democracy?…freedom? girls’ schools…? ….counter-terrorism?
It would be quite helpful if you could explain the difference between Left and Right today.
It’s best to focus on realities and actions, NOT on words and speeches.
Thanks.
Kent Clizbe says, “Prior to FDR entering WW2 to help the Brits and Stalin, “Conservative” would have meant that we stuck to the constitution and did not meddle in foreign intrigues.”
You know as well as I do that the US attempted to stay out of both WWI and WWII for those reasons.
The Zimmerman Note, in which Germany offered Mexico US territory for aiding them in an invasion, changed our response. The US did not even enter the war until Apr of 1917.
While Germany was bombing Britain and sinking ships during WWII, including ours, to starve Britain, we stayed neutral. The reason we became involved in WWII was because our base was attacked in Hawaii — we declared war on Japan. Germany then declared war on us.
Folks, don’t forget there was a mutual disarmament treaty with the US, the UK, Italy and Japan before WWII. The US and the UK followed through and reduced their naval and armed forces, while Italy, Germany and Japan secretly built up their militaries. So get with it. Countries with very very aggressive intentions have historically weakened us first by hook or crook.So the lesson here is that people who are engaged in weakening our military, our ability to make steel and to manufacture goods, are probably going to start a war. After you get bombed or invaded, you can either win, or lose. “Peace at any cost” only works until it doesn’t.
What nonsense (without having read the book, just going on the quotes in the article).
Another book that provides an excellent example that totally destroys the silly theory that today’s capitalism-hating CO2-scared-virtue-signallers are based on a H*tlerian belief system was raised in another comment above. The book is about an American 1% family–the American ambassador to *itler’s Germany as the war broke out, Dodd.
The book purports to show how alluring the N*zi beliefs were–why even young Martha, Dodd’s twenty-something socialite daughter, was sucked into the Aryan whirl! The book leaves out the whole story though.
The story of the Dodd family’s politics and beliefs is a near perfect parallel for today’s AGW in-crowd.
Martha Dodd, a rich and pampered American socialite, worked for the Soviet communist intelligence service. Her “admiration” of the Nazis, and sleeping with some of them, was a cover story to allow her to do her communist espionage work more effectively. Martha eventually defected to the communists, decades later, when she was indicted during the “Red Scare” and McCarthy’s revelations. Of course, there was no “Scare” about it, McCarthy was right. The US government was infiltrated from top to bottom with communist agents, all bent on destroying American culture, government, society, and economy. Martha died in communist Czechoslovakia
http://www.pennilesspress.co.uk/prose/strange_case_of_martha_dodd.htm
Being part of an international organization that trumpets its goal of “Saving the Planet” from evil (American) capitalism was then, and is now, the ultimate virtue signal. The true believers of the Comintern were carbon copies of today’s Green-anti-CO2-anti-capitalism hate-filled “do-gooders.”
Nothing N*zi about Dodd’s family. Nothing N*zi about Michael Mann and his PC-Progressive crowd.
Martha’s, and Mann’s belief system is straight out of Moscow. Their beliefs came to the USA carried in the Popular Front organizations covertly created and run by the Comintern. The aura of virtue that came from believing the “right” things, and the in-crowd that shared those beliefs, was so attractive, and such a successful approach to manipulating a culture, that the beliefs carry on till today. Mann today, and Dodd then, despise the Normal-Americans and our economy. They both were/are willing to lie, cheat and steal loudly, publicly, on the record attack our economy, and our way of life in an attempt to destroy it.
The “Green” hatred of capitalism, and the engine of the capitalist economy, “fossil fuels,” is a direct descendant of the Comintern operation to destroy the American economy. Dodd was a Willing Accomplice then, the CO2-hating crowd is now.
Nothing to do with N*zis or H*tler.
For a fuller story of Martha Dodd, see here:
http://www.pennilesspress.co.uk/prose/strange_case_of_martha_dodd.htm
What nonsense (without having read the book, just going on the quotes in the article).
Another book that provides an excellent example that totally destroys the silly theory that today’s capitalism-hating CO2-scared-virtue-signallers are based on a H*tlerian belief system was raised in another comment above. The book is about an American 1% family–the American ambassador to *itler’s Germany as the war broke out, Dodd.
The book purports to show how alluring the N*zi beliefs were–why even young Martha, Dodd’s twenty-something socialite daughter, was sucked into the Aryan whirl! The book leaves out the whole story though.
The story of the Dodd family’s politics and beliefs is a near perfect parallel for today’s AGW in-crowd.
Martha Dodd, a rich and pampered American socialite, worked for the Soviet communist intelligence service. Her “admiration” of the Nazis, and sleeping with some of them, was a cover story to allow her to do her communist espionage work more effectively. Martha eventually defected to the communists, decades later, when she was indicted during the “Red Scare” and McCarthy’s revelations. Of course, there was no “Scare” about it, McCarthy was right. The US government was infiltrated from top to bottom with communist agents, all bent on destroying American culture, government, society, and economy. Martha died in communist Czechoslovakia
Being part of an international organization that trumpets its goal of “Saving the Planet” from evil (American) capitalism was then, and is now, the ultimate virtue signal. The true believers of the Comintern were carbon copies of today’s Green-anti-CO2-anti-capitalism hate-filled “do-gooders.”
Nothing N*zi about Dodd’s family. Nothing N*zi about Michael Mann and his PC-Progressive crowd.
Martha’s, and Mann’s belief system is straight out of Moscow. Their beliefs came to the USA carried in the Popular Front organizations covertly created and run by the Comintern. The aura of virtue that came from believing the “right” things, and the in-crowd that shared those beliefs, was so attractive, and such a successful approach to manipulating a culture, that the beliefs carry on till today. Mann today, and Dodd then, despise the Normal-Americans and our economy. They both were/are willing to lie, cheat and steal loudly, publicly, on the record attack our economy, and our way of life in an attempt to destroy it.
The “Green” hatred of capitalism, and the engine of the capitalist economy, “fossil fuels,” is a direct descendant of the Comintern operation to destroy the American economy. Dodd was a Willing Accomplice then, the CO2-hating crowd is now.
Nothing to do with N*zis or H*tler.
For a fuller story of Martha Dodd, see here:
http://www.pennilesspress.co.uk/prose/strange_case_of_martha_dodd.htm
Fascists are on the left anyway, so this is not at all surprising. The obvious clue is in the Nazi party name of course, as in: National Socialist Workers Party but there are certain other unavoidable facts too – aside from Nazis..
For a start, Mussolini pretty much started fascism, yet he was a dedicated socialist who saw that his fellow socialists fought for their countries against socialists on the other side, so decided it needed a nationalist element to make it work. His friend and socialist philosopher Giovanni Gentile was also instrumental in creating fascism too,
In fact, pretty much ALL of the founding members of fascism were socialists!
It’s funny how the left in general have managed to fool everybody that the opposite is true but let’s face it, what’s the difference between fascists and communists? Hardly anything. They both strut about in smart uniforms and insist on adherence to ‘the state’ as Mussolini always made clear. They both rely on secret police, informers and fear to keep everybody cowed. They both insist on uniformity of thought and deed with complete loyalty to the state.
However, Hitler accentuated the ‘nationalist’ part of fascism to an extent beyond which other fascists wanted and in effect created a new form of fascism – an offshoot really
And although Hitler hated Marxists it was because of his disagreement with their own hatred of the individual and of private ownership. But his love of those things was only ever in the context of them being used for the betterment of the state. The Nazis looked more inwardly whereas Marxism was internationalist.
Whatever, at the end of the day, living in a socialist state or national socialist state had very little difference to people’s lives in terms of liberty and freedom of expression. Both are authoritarian in nature.
None of which is surprising. How else are you to coerce a nation into adopting an ideology except by force?
“How would you…” it’s by a process called “Slowly boiling the frog.” by politicians slowly implementing policies that some people don’t want but have to accept because some people do want them, the country slowly changes.
An excellent history of environmentalism and the UN here:
http://ecofascism.com/article18.html
Utter nonsense and trash. Why publish this stuff? It only gives this site a bad rep.
How revolting. Does anyone really believe this trash? Scary. Michael’s right, this kind of rhetoric only debases this site.
Being concerned about the future – including economic effects of warming – has absolutely nothing to do with wanting to destroy capitalism. It doesn’t matter if the two aims overlap in some people, they are distinct.
I have never seen anyone suggest humans should completely stop eating meat for the sake of the climate, although I suppose there are those who do.
It’s an enormous logical fallacy to pretend that everyone who supports AGW theory thinks the same, or is a fanatic. The statements made in this op-ed are themselves examples of fanaticism.
“Being concerned about the future – including economic effects of warming – has absolutely nothing to do with wanting to destroy capitalism. It doesn’t matter if the two aims overlap in some people, they are distinct.”
So, if your intentions are good/clean/pure, then the “unintended” results of your actions are okay?
There’s a couple of old-sayings that you might profitably study:
1. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
2. Walter Duranty, paraphrasing Lenin: To make an omelet, you’ve got to break a few eggs.
Your de-linking of the results from the actions demanded by your alarmist-activist clique is either evil, or abjectly naive.
The screeds of the modern-day central planner geniuses about “de-carbonizing” the economy are virtually identical to Lenin’s New Economic Plan geniuses.
They published their plans. Their intentions were pure. They were bringing utopia to Earth. When reality didn’t fit their plans, or real people didn’t cooperate–then heads rolled. Millions died.
The same results will occur if the AGW alarmists were ever to seize power.
You really haven’t been paying attention at all to the rhetoric of your own side, have you?
The statements here are NOT fanaticism. They are a response to fanaticism. Pretending otherwise, is carefully maintained willful ignorance.