Note from Anthony: This opinion piece covers a very ugly subject. I gave it careful consideration before I decided to run it. One of the considerations I made is how many times “climate justice” proponents have said and spread terrible things about me, as well as others who stand up to the green tyranny that has pervaded society. As ugly as these comparisons obviously are, had I not experienced some of the hatred and death wishes personally, I’d think it was over the top. Just ask Marc Morano about hate speech and death wishes.
Foreword by Paul Dreissen
Nazi ethics were hopelessly and perversely conflicted and schizophrenic. People obviously occupied a lower niche than animals on the Nazi “moral and ethical” hierarchy – and millions of innocent people were sent to their deaths.
Sadly, the more rabid elements of modern environmentalism have similar “ethics” – and play a major role in perpetuating poverty, disease, misery, malnutrition and early death in poor countries. Ironically, in the name of “keeping fossil fuels in the ground” to “save the planet” from “dangerous manmade climate change,” radical green policies would also destroy the very habitats and wildlife they claim to care so deeply about.
Perverse, conflicted ethical systems
Radical environmentalists put people last, and destroy habitats and wildlife to end fossil fuels
Guest opinion by Paul Driessen
Third Reich Forest Minister Hermann Goering was an avid hiker and ecologist who once sent a man to a concentration camp for cutting up a frog for fish bait. In 1933 he and other Nazi Party leaders enacted anti-vivisection laws to stop what he called “unbearable torture and suffering in animal experiments.”
Intensely hostile to capitalism, the Nazis controlled all industries and envisioned large-scale wind turbine projects that would generate “huge amounts of cheap energy” and create millions of German jobs.
But as Luftwaffe commander, Goering planned and directed the 1939 terror bombing of Warsaw and the final obliteration of the city’s Jewish ghetto. Thousands were slaughtered, and survivors were sent to the Treblinka concentration camp, under “the final solution” that he helped mastermind – to send millions of Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, “mentally deficient burdens” and other “sub-humans” to ovens and mass graves.
About the most charitable thing one can say about Nazi ethics is that they were perversely conflicted and schizophrenic. People clearly occupied a lower niche than animals on their “moral and ethical” hierarchy.
Sadly, the same observations apply to the more rabid elements of modern environmentalism. Ironically, in the name of “keeping fossil fuels in the ground” to “save the planet” from “dangerous manmade climate change” and other imagined calamities, radical greens also demand actions that would ultimately destroy the very habitats and wildlife they claim to love.
Their own words underscore their attitudes. Here are some examples.
“If we don’t overthrow capitalism, we don’t have a chance of saving the world ecologically.” (Earth First! activist Judy Bari) “Loggers losing their jobs because of spotted owl legislation is no different than people being out of work after the furnaces of Dachau shut down.” (Friends of the Earth founder David Brower)
People have become “a cancer … a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth. Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.” (National Park Service scientist David Graber) “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation.” (Prince Philip of England)
“Even if animal research produced a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it.” (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals president Ingrid Newkirk) “Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses.” (Newkirk again)
Banning DDT in Sri Lanka might well unleash a malaria epidemic, but “so what? People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them, and this is as good a way as any.” Besides, in the United States, DDT substitutes “only kill farm workers, and most of them are Mexicans and Negroes.” (Environmental Defense Fund scientist Charles Wurster)
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.” (Paul Ehrlich, who in 1968 predicted mass starvation and a collapse of civilization by the 1980s)
“It’s much cheaper for everybody in Africa to have electricity where they need it,” from little solar panels “on their huts.” (Actor Ed Begley, Jr.) People in developing countries “simply cannot expect to have the material lifestyle of the average American.” (Friends of the Earth president Brent Blackwelder)
These attitudes, policies and demands prevail today. Radical greens still advance the same irrational, intolerant views about pesticides to control insect-borne diseases; genetically modified crops to feed more people from less acreage with less water; and access to abundant, reliable, affordable energy required to power modern industrialized societies in Africa, Asia and other less developed regions.
The world’s poorest families still live unnecessarily squalid, miserable, diseased, malnourished, short lives. Billions still don’t even have electricity, clean water, light bulbs or a tiny refrigerator.
It’s awful enough that they were born into these places and conditions, and must endure corrupt, kleptocratic dictators. It is intolerable that their hopes and dreams are also stymied by unelected, unaccountable eco-imperialist activists and bureaucrats, who prance, preen and profess their commitment to “marginalized” people – but care about them only if they are “threatened” by capitalism or climate change. Not surprisingly, they brazenly ignore their own callous roles in this injustice.
The world’s dark-skinned people remain at the bottom of the environmentalist ethical hierarchy – with millions dying every year from preventable diseases of poverty, perpetuated by callous environmentalists. Developed country loggers, miners, factory workers, ranchers, pensioners and poor minorities are not much higher up; farmers also get short shrift, unless they grow corn, soybeans or canola for biofuels.
The battle over fossil fuels has recently entered other dangerous territory, as “protesters” launch campaigns reminiscent of radicals putting spikes in trees so that sawmill blades would explode and injure workers – while comrades bombed GMO and animal testing labs, meat packing plants and even houses.
Their targets now are oil and natural gas transport systems – as a prelude to more rampant destruction – as Putin aides and cronies assist and finance other groups that are trying to block US energy production.
A new cadre of Earth Liberation Front anarchists has taken to closing the valves on pipelines – sabotage that could result in pipeline ruptures, oil spills, explosions, injuries and deaths. In one case, the “valve turners” called the Keystone pipeline operations center just minutes before closing the valve, causing the valve wheel and ground below the saboteurs’ feet to shake. They could have caused a disaster.
If caught, arrested and prosecuted, these extremists invoke the “necessity defense” – asserting that they were compelled to break the law, in order to prevent a greater harm: manmade climate cataclysms.
The eco-terror groups have issued a “Decisive Ecological Warfare” manifesto, urging like-minded criminal elements to commit sabotage against pipelines, transmission lines, oil tankers and refineries. As in the past, the militants want “more moderate” environmental groups to support the “necessity” defense, acts of sabotage, and the use of eco-terrorism to “disrupt and dismantle industrial civilization” and “remove the ability of the powerful to exploit the marginalized and destroy the planet.”
They want more “mainstream” pressure groups to promote the notion that sabotage is acceptable and normal where Earth’s future is at stake. Environmentalists have already persuaded Western institutions not to support pesticide use, fossil fuel power plant construction and other modern technologies in poor, disease-ridden, energy-deprived countries – so maybe this lunacy no longer so farfetched.
Several states have passed “critical infrastructure protection” bills, assessing criminal penalties on terrorists and organizations that conspire to trespass on or damage essential infrastructure sites. The bills also hold parties responsible for any resultant damages to property or persons; they should also penalize foundations and other financiers of eco-terror. All 50 states and Congress should enact similar bills.
The asserted justifications that drive perverse, conflicted environmentalist ethics are based on ideologies, assertions and computer models that label humans, capitalism and modern technologies as existential threats to our planet. They have given rise to a $1.5-trillion-per-year Climate Industrial Complex that is determined to expand its revenues and control people’s lives, livelihoods and living standards – while redistributing wealth mostly to those who would be in power and those who would keep them in power, while sending just enough to the world’s poorest families to improve their lives slightly at the margins.
Ironically, in the process, eco-activists will inflict far more damage on environmental values than do the technologies they despise. Their “solutions” to alleged ecological “problems” will turn billions of acres into wind and solar farms, biofuel plantations, hydroelectric projects, and mines for materials needed for wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and other “clean, green, renewable” energy alternatives.
The twentieth century revealed how thin the veneer of humanity, civilization and ethics can be, when propaganda, fear-mongering, hatred and emotions take over. We need to muster enough science, intellectual rigor and freedom of speech to prevent more deaths in the name of “environmental justice.”
Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy and environmental policy.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A couple more quotes to think on
Christine Stewart Canadian Minister of the environment at Kyoto, who said: said’ No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits…..climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.’
Christiana Figueres ex UN Environment ‘chief’ said “… we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution”.
The sturm und drang of the more main stream socialist environmental pressure groups empower and embolden their violent Sturmabteilung (‘Storm Trooper’) cadres, the fascist brown shirt enforcers of environmental ‘superior philosophy’. Given the ‘differences without distinction’ between the organization of the modern environmentalist movement and the socialist democrats of pre-WWII Germany that brought Hitler to power, is there any surprise when modern ‘environmentalists’ call for the imprisonment of ‘morally or mentally deficient skeptics’?
ex.: http://www.nationalpost.com/Jail+politicians+ignore+climate+science+Suzuki/290513/story.html
ex.: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/14/bill-nye-open-criminal-charges-jail-time-climate-c/
ex.: https://youtu.be/41yJTxrPFhM RFK wants to jail energy CEOs
ex.: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/19/climate-alarmists-obama-use-rico-laws-jail-skeptics/
Will the gates into these environmental prisons be over-arched with ‘Environmentalism Arbeit Macht Frei’??
There is man, the destroyer, the user, the taker; but there is also “gardener man,” – the kind of man that improves where ever he is.
It seems the “re-incarnated virus” has gone viral. After all, the WWF was founded by Prince Philip (Virus), Prince Bernhard (SS intelligence), and Sir Julian Huxley (Eugenics).
An ancient oligarchical tradition of subjugation and genocide well documented by Homer and Hesiod , posted here : https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/04/21/18-examples-of-the-spectacularly-wrong-predictions-made-around-the-first-earth-day-in-1970/#comment-2796330
It was clear to many in power that Hitler’s Nazis targeted first the chronically ill – Aktion T4, only then the Holocaust, and planned after that all of Christ-ianity. Martin Heidegger, their “theoretician” , whitewashed by his mistress Hannah Arendt later, was Hitler’s ghostwriter, defended today as a “philosopher”.
How about this : Emmanuel Faye professeur de philosophie moderne et contemporaine à l’Université de Rouen Normandie : Arendt et Heidegger : extermination nazie et destruction de la pensée
Extermination and destruction of thought go hand in hand. The target, Jews, because they carried the flame of European humanist thought, to be extinguished however.
WUWT does note the destruction of thought itself – there is the reason.
But one name is missing from the list – the Mephistopheles of the 20th Century, Lord Bertrand Russell. Just one read of “The impact of Science on Society” shows the direct overlap with Heidegger’s destruction of thought.
Global Warming is simply Russell’s “snow is black or any shade of grey depending on cost”. Notice the AGW arguments in this mirror.
Another name missing – Emmanuel Kant – the “Robespierre of the human spirit”, as great poet and philosopher Heinrich Heine well knew.
Heidegger, Kant (Edgar Allan Poe’s “Can’t”), Russell, all revered in Uni’s Depts.
Hey Mods, what is triggering that?
Not to mention the obvious points that Hitler was vegetarian and that Nazi art glorified women — they were portrayed literally on pedestals.
How about a little ironic ‘positivity’, as counterweight to the troubling topic of the article above?
Shock Study: Climate Skeptics More ‘Eco-Friendly’ than Climate Alarmists
“Michael Hall, a psychologist from the University of Michigan, led a team of researchers in a yearlong longitudinal study of 600 Americans who “regularly reported their climate change beliefs, pro-environmental behavior, and other climate-change related measures” and published the results of their study in The Journal of Environmental Psychology.”
“The results of the study contradicted the intuitive assumption that people most concerned about climate change would be the most likely to engage in eco-friendly behavior, revealing instead that the contrary is true. There is an inverse correlation between climate-change concern and environmentally beneficial action.”
story: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/05/06/shock-study-climate-skeptics-eco-friendly-climate-alarmists/
link to paywalled paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494418301488
Great article. I can see why people get so passionate about both sides of the argument. Do you believe we are “just another animal” on the Planet? Or privileged above all others? Seems to me as the top predator we should be intelligent enough to care for others. But alas it doesn’t appear so.
We are caring for the others.
Interestingly enough, more “top predators” in the world, namely hunters and fishers, who label themselves Conservationists rather than Environmentalists, do more to preserve forests, clean streams, and wetlands, and the animals, fish, and birds that live there, than Environmentalists will ever do. They are actually concerned with preserving a natural resource and the responsible use of it. Most Environmentalists are mostly about virtue signalling and rabid anti-capitalism dressed up as concern for the environment.
Severian, I was raised in the conservation tradition, the most successful environmental movement in history. The accomplishments of the modern environmental movement pale in comparison. The difference, the conservation movement know that humans have made mistakes but also recognize humans also are the solution. The modern environmental movement sees humans as a disease that needs to be wipe from the face of the earth. To them humans, especially capitalists, are more evil than the devil himself. They hate looking at data the clearly shows otherwise.
Core of this radical environmentalism might be the “Mother Earth” concept.
Nobody will call the bricks of his house or his computer or his bike “mother” .
The earth is not a mother but our nest and also our lumberyard.
There is simply no choice, to live means to exploit the earth.
Environmental organisations once coined the mother earth idea with the result that every believer has to live in deep sin. Climate change is now regarded as the revenge of mother earth.
Copycats.
It is very easy to get a copy of the real Bible.
served in germany (us army) in late 1980’s, at that time still many ww2 citizens around. they also said that the eco laws were extreme and a tree was considered more important that a human.
and believe me, anytime a vehicle did tree damage the US paid for it in spades including the expected generations of trees the org tree would have spawned.
Germans loved it whenever a US tank ran over their gardens. Big bucks!
yup, big bucks still not as expensive as forestry damage was though
What you experienced then is still common practice, fueled by more and more pseudo-greens living in cloudcuckooland. Even today, the words ‘ecological’ or ‘sustainable’ still trigger the complete shutdown of common sense.
true however they make less $$ from us army as drawdowns have taken most of the tracked/field forces out of there.
Encountering severe icing, need lower.
I don’t think pro-hydroelectric power generation ideology is part of the eco-frauds’ mentality.
Is the Lead referring to Norman O. Brown, who would become famous in the 1960’s by combining Marcuse’s “Eros and Civilization” hedonism theory with Wilhelm Reich’s orgone therapy to popularize “polymorphous perversity”? Marcuse’s “life-style” has indeed become the meme. Reich claimed Nazism was caused by monogamy.
Funny how history repeats.
Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Fancy title, interesting concept, yet those selling it are the same kind.
After 30 years of listening to these same persons wail,abuse and threaten..it occurs to me that it is impossible to parody such mass hysteria.
Looking at some of the more well known activists, they are characters who would be unbelievable if created in a work of fiction.
The cult certainty of “The Science” is a deadpan mockery of themselves, yet they march on.
Imaging ones self as the last hero of the environment calls for no humility, reflection is for those who doubt.
As noted by many,true evil arrises from that conviction you are 100% correct and thus righteous in the carrying out of the “necessary actions” to save the world for all.
Which is how fools rush in where angels fear to tread., unbound by doubt or uncertainty the “enlightened ones”are going to save us..even if they kill us and 3/4 of other life on this planet.
The “solutions” of course are always the same.
Keep the poor poor, cripple national economies and control everything.
Eugenics never was abandoned by our Progressive Comrades.
And slavery is in their words, a fitting use for the “Unpersons”.
At the risk of annoying philistines, how could Heinrich Heine with his “The Romantic School” correctly foresee Hitler 100 years before, calling Robespierre-et-al a coffee-shop in comparison?
Yep, lets insult the audience, then ask a rhetorical question.
Ben
It is appropriate to write and publish this article.
Over the past 2,000 years, every great experiment in authoritarian government ran until the leaders granted themselves the privilege of state murder. Each had an inspiring banner,
As Rome was corrupted by an ambitious bureaucracy to a murderous police state the banner was the “Genius of the Emperor”.
In the 1500s, under the “Infallibility of the Pope” and the “Divine right of kings” the Church was corrupted to a murderous police state.
Of course, Communists were out to create the “Perfect Man”, for the Nazis it was the “Perfect” race and land space.
Today’s authoritarians are out to set the temperature of the nearest planet to “Perfect”.
For this, they have even enlisted the “Infallibility of the Pope”. Despite lingering scientific embarrassment from 400 years ago.
The major trend scares me–to the core–and deserves widespread criticism.
Bob Hoye
Hang in there Anthony. We love your courage, your honesty, your honorable respect for and love of science and the scientific method and your splendid behavior in the face of hate-filled politically motivated detractors and pure evil. Don’t let these vile people destroy science and turn it into just another despicable political beast from hell. Fight on.
Some people seem upset by this comparison. The comparison isn’t a literal one, for the greens aren’t building gas chambers and forcing the masses into them. The point is, they do talk about it.
As is oft said, history repeats itself. Those who do not learn from history, are condemned to repeat it (~ Stantayana). The problem being that if there are enough of those, the rest of us are condemned to repeat it with them. Fascism for the “greater good”, 8 million ruthlessly exterminated. Russian Communism, 20 million more for the common good. Pol Pot, millions more. Chinese Communism, 10’s of millions, all for the common good.
Sarajevo in 1984 was home to the Winter Olympics, the very symbol of global peace and friendly competition. Not many years later, it was the scene of ethnic cleansing. When descent into chaos, hate and evil happens, it happens frighteningly fast.
Which is why this comparison is appropriate. A constant reminder of what we can so easily become is the best way to guard against becoming that very thing. It isn’t the last step on the road to h*ll that we must guard against. It is the first one.
If I may…
1. Greenpeace a few years ago posted some vile content about what should be done to skeptics on their site. They got a major backlash, much of it from readers on this site alerted to it by Anth_ny. The backed down, fast,
2. There was a professor at a major university in Vienna who posted on the university web site that skeptics should be placed in re-education camps, and if that failed, to dispose of them. Anth_ny exposed it and thanks to the backlash, much of it from this site, the offensive material was removed.
3. 350.or posted a hate filled video that among other things depicted young children being murdered out of hand for questioning CAGW. That content was removed after a storm of protest, much of it from readers at this site.
These are the first steps down a slippery slope. Fight them at the first step because by the time the last one comes, it is too late.
Not to mention book burning. The Church of Climate Change is indeed fundamentally N@zi in its mindset.
i hope people take heed of this post david. call them out every single time.
David, appreciate that Nazi Germany didn’t happen overnight. It was well over two decades in the making with a lot of help by people and governments in total denial about the evils. You are correct with your quote about those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat. Yet it was not said once, it has been said many times throughout history almost always to be ignored, as it is today, by people that see history as not worth learning, just not important. The ethnic cleansing in the Balkans started a very long time ago when Ottoman Turks would come there each year, remove healthy male children from Orthodox Christian families, take them back to Istanbul, force convert them to Islam and then either castrate them for use a bureaucrats or make them elite troops for the Sultan. Remember the Ottoman Empire, the last caliphate, lasted until the end of the Great War. Then Tito had kept revenge in check since WWII. Some times we get on the path to hell well down the road, yet we must understand when the first step was taken. We do that only through the study of history.
It’s not ignored, it is rationalized by the “end (great good) justifies the (any and all) means.
If the tanks need R&R they’d better go somewhere else. Either you respect private property or hefty compensation is due. It is the same mentality all around the world.
It’s hard to maneuver a 70-ton vehicle precisely enough to avoid a one yard-wide strip at the side of a road.
Especially when the driver’s vision is limited and even with the commander and gunner’s heads out of the turret, they too can’t see much close to the vehicle.
Indeed. Tanks are vehicles expressly designed to go over and/or through obstacles, not to navigate around them.
A Leopard helping make a woodland-owners’ year!
The gross weight comes close and not very much above 60 metric tons. Of course I do accept driving errors if learners are in the driving seat. But a professional ought to be able to steer such a vehicle with greater precision than 1 ft onto the RR flatcars. BTW, we were talking about “in the garden” and not just about a steamrollered fence. Not a nice view to see carrots, onions and beans smashed in the garden instead of the stew. My grandma would have gone berserk.
This could have been written more convincingly without the tired reference to the Nazi’s and their madness — using them as a foil in the comparison weakens rather than strengthens the argument.
That many of the pro-Environment and anti-Corporate movements are also misanthropic anti-Human campaigns with little regard for the poor and needy has been obvious since the 1960s. There are many more quotes that could have been given that would turn the stomach of the average person.
OMG there are nazis everywhere.
Yes, the environmentalist movement is loaded with their moral equivalents.
Well Mosh this is the most balked tangential comment section I’ve read on wuwt. References to Hitler etal., always produce this. The post’s purpose would have been just as effective without the recourse to Nazis to give it some zingers.
A debunking and exposition of this “Decisive Ecological Warfare” manifesto would have made more sense than preaching to the converted about greenie extremism.
https://deepgreenresistance.org/documents/chapter-14-decisive-ecological-warfare.pdf
https://deepgreenresistance.org/en/deep-green-resistance-strategy/decisive-ecological-warfare
Which gets its’ misanthropic brew from here:
https://archive.org/stream/IndustrialSocietyAndItsFuture-TheUnabombersManifesto/IndustrialSocietyAndItsFuture-theUnabombersManifesto_djvu.txt
It’s funny when you think about it. What causes of mass suffering do we have in history other than people who think other people are in the way of a (nearly) perfect world, and in what proportion?
Because it seems that’s what’s behind the pretty much every human mass destruction. I mean, that and revenge, though the latter is awfully similar to the former.
This doesn’t mean people should strive for the better, but should be terribly clear whether their motive is improvement or resentment.
I do not like this never ending fight, that gets meaner and meaner, and more and more ridiculous.
People want to immigrate, from undeveloped countries to developed countries as life is very hard without cheap reliable energy and stable honest governments that work, construct and maintain roads, maintain rule of law and so on. They have neither.
We should be helping the undeveloped countries rather than fighting about open borders which is forced chaos that makes our country more like the undeveloped country.
This problem (climate wars) is different as it is tied to hard science. The hard science does not support CAGW, it barely supports AGW.
Based on Germany’s experience the super forced solution for the none CAGW problem (solar and wind) does not work, regardless of how much we spend on it.
Germany is the richest of the EU countries. The Germans are now taking steps to stop subsides for solar and wind because that scheme does not work (German CO2 emissions stopped dropping even though more solar and wind was installed) and the German people will not pay more for their electricity.
If this was a normal problem, someone on the other side, would have the courage, to explain using basic engineering and the amount spent vs benefits achieved for Germany why solar and wind are absolutely limited, do not work.
I was intrigued by the claim that Dr Charles Wurster once sad that DDT substitutes only kill farm workers and most of them are mexicans or negroes. That sounds incredible to me. I have done a quick google search on this but can only find references wherein he is ‘repoetted to have once said’ and most of these references are by Paul Dreissen himself. If anyone can point me to an authoritative source for this quote I’d be very grateful
Peter, that quote did not pass my B/S test either. I also googled it and found nothing but articles repeating the quote in the last few days. If he had really said that, it would have made national news and he would have been excoriated, ostracized and shunned. I don’t argue the main thrust of this article that today’s environmentalists ignore many of the costs of their solutions to our problems, but I don’t think we are helped by what I can only believe is a false quotation.
I would also remind everyone that comparing your opponent to Hitler/Nazis is a failure tactic for persuasion. It means you’ve already lost the argument and are stooping to ad hominem/false generalization attacks. See how well the “Trump is Hitler” meme as an example.
This article would be much more useful if the list of insane environmentalist quotes included hyperlinked sources/citations for each quote.
It is good to have a healthy BS detector, but even the quotes that pass that test aren’t “usable” unless they can be verified. (Not usable by me, anyhow.)
I did some googling, and it appears that the source for the Wurster statement was a 1969 luncheon speech by estranged Environmental Defense Fund co-founder Victor John Yannacone, Jr.:
http://donpesci.blogspot.com/2008/12/environmental-defense-fund-burries-ddt.html
I’ll play.
“… People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them… –Environmental Defense Fund scientist Charles Wurster
Apparently, Thanos was not the first to come up with the idea of solving the problems of overpopulation, hunger, and suffering by killing off half the population. All he did was expand the idea to include the entire universe. I wonder how many extreme environmentalists consider Thanos to be the hero, instead of the villain, of the Infinity Wars movie. He does what they can only dream of.
Thank you, Paul Driessen, for telling it like it is.
For anyone who is interested in more background information on the subject at hand, I would like to recommend:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/02/the_nazi_origins_of_apocalypti.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/10/the_original_environazis.html
Very unsettling, for Greens, that is. Yet very clarifying for everyone else, imho.