The Watermelon Agenda

Yesterday I wrote about Green Fatigue.  Today I stumbled into one excellent example of why the green movement is failing so badly.

James Gustav Speth in the Nation blames capitalism for everything wrong with the enviroment, the green movement and his life.

First, Speth acknowledges that warmists are not effective:

In my environmental work for close to four decades, I’ve always assumed America’s environmental community would do the same–get stronger and prevail against the current. But in the past few years I have come to the conclusion that this assumption is incorrect. The environmental community has grown in strength and sophistication, but the environment has continued to deteriorate.

Instead of recognizing that environmentalists failure is because of the nature of the people involved, Speth blames forces outside the warmist circle, notably the lefts sworn enemy, capitalism:

It is no accident that environmental crisis is gathering as social injustice is deepening and growing inequality is impairing democratic institutions. Each is the result of a system of political economy–today’s capitalism–that is profoundly committed to profits and growth and profoundly indifferent to nature and society.

and…

Capitalism as it is constituted today produces an economy and politics that are highly destructive to the environment.

Speth demonstrates why you can’t trust anything a warmist says, the real agenda has nothing to do with a trace gas in the atmosphere or polar bears, it’s about suppressing growth, stupid:

Instead of merely pursuing GDP growth, we need policies that address social needs directly–that strengthen families and communities and address the breakdown of social connectedness and the erosion of social capital; that guarantee good, well-paying jobs (and green-collar ones); that provide for universal healthcare and alleviate the devastating effects of mental illness; that provide a good education for all; that ensure care and companionship for the chronically ill and incapacitated; that recognize responsibilities to the half of humanity who live in poverty.

Would it be too much to ask where all the money comes from for the panoply of ‘social capital’ if policies attack growth?  To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, the problem for socialists is that they always run out of other people’s money.

But don’t worry, you won’t miss capitalism, it’s bad for you:

Psychological studies show that materialism is toxic to happiness and that more income and more possessions do not lead to a lasting sense of well-being or satisfaction with life.

Speth has a list to do list for environmentalists:

Environmentalists must join social progressives to address the crisis of inequality unraveling our social fabric and undermining democracy.

Environmentalists must also join those seeking to reform politics and strengthen democracy.

Environmentalists need to embrace public financing of elections, lobbying regulation, nonpartisan Congressional redistricting and other reforms as a core of their agenda.

Notice that it’s all political, all the time.  That’s because global warming has always been about politics, the ‘argument’ over science is specious at best, this movement hates your lifestyle and is about tearing it down.  Green on the outside, red on the inside – meet the watermelon agenda.

[ad#insert-large]

9 thoughts on “The Watermelon Agenda”

  1. “Environmentalists need to embrace public financing of elections, lobbying regulation, nonpartisan Congressional redistricting and other reforms as a core of their agenda.”

    Uh…they are already doing that–mostly through massive election fraud.
    But never fear. Obamandius, God/King of the Chicago Carbon Exchange, will use HIS oil spill, you know–the one he isn’t allowing anyone to clean up, to push the CAP & Tax nobody wants. Blaming everyone but himself…kind of like Speth.

  2. The most egregious examples of man-made environmental catastrophes ALL occurred in the Soviet Union, the Eastern Bloc, and other socialist-communist-totalitarian states – and they still had lousy economies. Capitalism and private property are a boon to environmental conservation and protection.

  3. The Left has a history of using pseudoscience as a prop. Starting with the Marxist pseudoscience of history, through the original Progressives and eugenics in the 1920s, through Goreism in the pat 20 years. It makes sense. If you abjure religion and tradition, what props do you have left?

  4. Notice that it’s all political, all the time. That’s because global warming has always been about politics, the ‘argument’ over science is specious at best, this movement hates your lifestyle and is about tearing it down. Green on the outside, red on the inside – meet the watermelon agenda.

    Really. Ignoring the dog-whistle of calling it the “watermelon” agenda, lets move on to the meat of your assertion.

    You are right that the ‘argument’ over the science is specious. That is because the science is clear. AGW is real, it is dangerous, and it will be expensive to cope with. What is specious is the allegation that there is an ‘argument’. There isn’t an argument, there is the science on one side and then there are the entrenched interests opposed to the science because it will affect their bottom line on the other.

    It’s a bit like drilling offshore oil wells. You can save money, in the short term, by not installing all the correct safety equipment and by ‘skipping’ procedures established to prevent accidents. But in the long term….

    As for the ‘hates your lifestyle’ crack, I quote what you yourself posted:

    Instead of merely pursuing GDP growth, we need policies that address social needs directly–that strengthen families and communities and address the breakdown of social connectedness and the erosion of social capital; that guarantee good, well-paying jobs (and green-collar ones); that provide for universal healthcare and alleviate the devastating effects of mental illness; that provide a good education for all; that ensure care and companionship for the chronically ill and incapacitated; that recognize responsibilities to the half of humanity who live in poverty.

    Wow. Such hate. How dare he suggest that everyone should be have good well-paying jobs, adequate health care, and that people should care for the poor.

  5. Wow. Such hate. How dare he suggest that everyone should be have good well-paying jobs, adequate health care, and that people should care for the poor
    Ok, then how is taxing the shit out of americans into the poor house and spending tax payer revenue like it grows on tree going to ensure that, especially when most green jobs are temporary, and at the cost of two other jobs?

    That is because the science is clear. AGW is real, it is dangerous, and it will be expensive to cope with.
    If you call a report that was 40% fraudulant, and used uncited and non-peer reviewed materials from such groups like WWF and greenpeace clear! lol

    My advice to you, benji, is to get your crap together before you step into the skeptic lion’s den, or you will get torn a new one.

Comments are closed.