The Green Gun Reloaded
To “Save The Planet,” Environmental Socialists Would Force On Us Life In A Technologically Earlier Time. This Will Not Be The Change We Can Believe In.
By Perry Hicks- Special to GulfCoastNews.com 9/29/09
Sometime back, I found myself part of a small audience to an environmental harangue about global warming. The individual, sounding quite authoritative with his arguments, was having sway with this little group until I asked aloud this one question, “Just what temperature should the planet be, anyway?”
The question stopped the self styled activist dead in his tracks because for all the environmental hype over global warming, no one can definitively answer this question.
As we have seen with the Pascagoula data given in the previous article, average annual temperature is quite literally associated with time. So the question leaps beyond the subject of temperature to just what point in time do environmentalists want us to live?
This is where these self-proclaimed champions of nature fall silent. If industrialization has brought about the rape, pillage, and pollution of Mother Nature, then the optimum era to live would have to be a pre-industrial one. It would be fatal to their cause to admit that their ultimate goal is to roll back time and force us to live in a pre-industrial world.
Hence, they work to shutter factories, make energy and commodities prohibitively expensive, and so force us to live with an austerity known only by our distant ancestors.
A Third World America
By modern standards, pre-industrial America was not a pleasant place to live. In all but the largest cities, the streets were not just dirt, but a filthy amalgam of animal waste and soil. In an effort to avoid the filthy dust of summer and the mud and muck of winter, town homes of the better sort had their first floors built well above ground level.
In the cities, where at least some of the streets could be cobbled with stone, the clatter of wooden wagon and carriage wheels was deafening. Defecating and urinating animals, whether pulling wagons or being driven to market, filled the streets.
Beasts of burden often died in harness and so were simply cut out and left to balloon up on the side of the road. With the many animals came flies and other insects that could not be kept out of the home because window screens had not yet been invented. Cities in particular were known for their stench.
Rural life was not much better. Without modern equipment and agricultural chemicals, farm life was one of intense manual labor. Weeds had to be hoed, and pests had to be quite literally removed by hand… if they could be removed at all.
In all places daily life was a struggle. Without refrigeration, food spoiled literally within hours so perishables had to be gathered each day, prepared, and cooked. Laundry was not a choice of “permanent press” or “gentle cycle”, it was back breaking hand scrubbing and open air drying. These things, along with child rearing, kept women largely tied to the home.
Beyond the westward migration, travel was the domain of the well to do. Infant mortality was extremely high. It was not uncommon for men to have more than one wife in a life time for all too frequently pregnancy was a death sentence.
Surely, you may ask, with all the scientific discoveries and inventions over the last 200 years, we couldn’t possibly go back to those “halcyon” days, could we?
The answer is: Not exactly. While progress could never be totally thwarted, America could be forced to take on many attributes of a third world nation, at least if some environmentalists had there way.
Imagine an America where half the land mass of the contiguous 48 states is classified as wilderness and no one, other than research scientists, are allowed to enter it. Further imagine that around the wilderness is a buffer zone where entry is by permit only. This would force nearly 300 million Americans, and the necessary agriculture to sustain them, into a space perhaps one third of what we have now.
In such a country, living would be almost exclusively high-rise. Travel of any kind would have to be largely done by mass transit. Energy usage would be strictly regulated so gone would be powerful cars, bright lighting, and home air conditioning. The cost of everything would be very expensive. Little bits of just about anything left over would have to be horded in case it was needed again in the future.
Such a grim picture of an alternative America couldn’t possibly become a reality, could it? Wouldn’t that take a drastic change in our Constitution? Does the Government have the power to make such sweeping sociopolitical changes?
The answer to these questions depends on who you talk to; some would say the 9th and 10th Amendments would say no; others would argue that the “general welfare” clause of the Constitution's preamble would say yes.
While it is quite unlikely any new “scientific” revelations would spark such a upheaval, there is considerable evidence that incremental steps are being taken in that direction, including the building of legal environmental precedents through a combination of governmental regulation and the manipulation of common law.
Its All About Power And Control
At the fall of the old Soviet Union, then Premier Mikhail Gorbachev concluded that environmentalism would make a fine new home for communism. In 1993, he founded Green Cross International, a non-profit organization dedicated to “cultivating harmonious relations between humans and the environment”. Although well camouflaged, global warming is near the top of Green Cross’s agenda. Its place is just beneath the two primary objectives of “eradication of poverty and overcoming the growing gulf between rich and poor”.
Owing to the many on-going ecological disasters Russia suffered during Gorbachev’s watch as the Soviet premier, a neutral observer might be surprised at the former premier’s new interest in the environment. But if you research his many public quotes you will come across these telling ones:
Mikhail Gorbachev once described the state of Soviet affairs, at the time of his ascension to power, as one where Soviet central planning was vitally concerned with the availability of toothpaste, laundry detergent, and women’s pantyhose. Yet, he clings to communism.
Carbon Dioxide: The Perfect Tool For A Social(ist) Change
Carbon is an essential building block of life and energy-wise, it is into almost everything. These facts makes it the perfect tool to bring about a socialist revolution. If redefined as a “pollutant,” sequestering it could drive the United States down into a third or even fourth rate power.
America's enemies love to point out that the United States consumes a disproportionate amount of world energy. What they leave out is that if America has the largest economy on earth, it only follows that America would consume the most energy. Thus, it would only follow that America would be the world’s leading consumer of carbon containing fuels (read fossil fuel: oil, natural gas, and coal).
In making this charge, they unwittingly make tacit admissions that they do not recognize private ownership of anything, particularly energy; they do not value economic productivity; and they most definitely do not value free market capitalism.
Furthermore, if that carbon containing fuel is otherwise made in short supply or otherwise difficult to extract, then America will not be able to economically meet all of its energy needs and therefore would not be able to sustain its prosperity. The loss of prosperity would then lead to social unrest.
That is the basis of socialist-environmentalist alliance to fight “global warming.” If the leader of the free world could be deprived of energy, have its industry moved overseas, and by other means have its money become worthless, then America would no longer be able to lead and to protect its allies. The power vacuum left by us would bring about a new world order.
In short, world power would be transferred to dictatorships and otherwise repressive regimes. America would be barely able to defend itself much less extend any kind of protective umbrella to its remaining endangered allies, such as Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan.
That is the ultimate motivation for global warming. By fighting it, socialists could end democratic self government and do so without ever having fired a shot.
Next we will detail some of the more looney schemes propagated by socialists masquerading as environmentalists.
About the Author.....
Perry Hicks is the senior writer and Washington correspondent for GCN. He is a former Mississippi Coast resident and was a correspondent for the old Gulfport Star Journal. He has appeared on Fox News Channel. Perry has also hosted his own radio talk show on the auto industry with a mix of politics. Perry is a frequent contributor to GCN writing on stories of national importance with local interests. His articles can be found in the GCN Archive.
Contact the Author: firstname.lastname@example.org