Gay Patriot Header Image

Environmental Extremists Hate Kittens and Puppies Too

Posted by V the K at 8:45 am - August 7, 2017.
Filed under: Environmental Wackos (ManBearPig)

Gaia does not approve of Doggos and Kittehs.

Can pets be part of a sustainable future?

The short, if unpopular, answer is probably not. Two German Shepherds use more resources just for their annual food needs than the average Bangladeshi uses each year in total. And while pet owners may disagree that Bangladeshis have more right to exist than their precious Schnookums, the truth is that pets serve little more societal purpose than keeping us company in an increasingly individualistic and socially isolated consumer society.

And this isn’t an isolated Guardian whackjob making this argument. A UCLA study reached essentially the same conclusion.

And the answer to this “problem” is… spoiler alert… Big Socialist Government.

Governments could facilitate this by strengthening the pet licensing system, for example, creating a very steep tax on pets (along with pet products and pet food) and tripling that tax for pets that aren’t spayed or neutered (so that only breeders would choose not to fix their pets).

At the same time, marketing of pets and pet products should be tightly regulated (or banned outright), and polluting veterinarian services like chemotherapy should be reserved only for service animals.

And then, outlaw pet ownership entirely. Make cats and dogs community property, to be shared by everyone and allocated by the Government according to fairness and sustainability.

Reserving a play date with your favorite Golden Retriever once a week would reduce pet ownership – and the resulting economic and environmental costs – dramatically as people felt comfortable occasionally playing with a shared pet instead of owning one.

We’re All Going to Die

Posted by V the K at 10:55 am - July 10, 2017.
Filed under: Environmental Wackos (ManBearPig)

According to David Wallace-Wells (“a writer living in New York,” which makes him a total authority on everything), climate change is going to kill us all by the end of the century.

Absent a significant adjustment to how billions of humans conduct their lives, parts of the Earth will likely become close to uninhabitable, and other parts horrifically inhospitable, as soon as the end of this century.

So, if you were *planning* on living until the end of the century, you’re going to be SOL.

And then David Wallace-Wells goes into a list of horrors that will most definitely happen unless we give up our sinful ways. Plagues! Famines! Wars!

However, there is one way… and only one way… to avoid this Catastrophe according to the Alarmists. And that is to give the Alarmists complete control of the world’s economy, politics, and society. Also, billions and billions of dollars to climate alarmists like David Wallace-Wells.

Europe Enacting 1974’s Environmental Agenda

Posted by V the K at 12:22 pm - July 9, 2017.
Filed under: Environmental Wackos (ManBearPig)

Carmaker Volvo (“They’re boxy but they’re good.”) has announced its intention to phase out all production of gasoline-powered vehicles within two years. I am sure this is all about “saving the environments” and nothing at all to do with the fact that Volvo is a Chinese-owned company and China has a severe overcapacity for battery-production.

Meanwhile in France, the Government of President Jupiter has decreed that all gasoline and diesel powered vehicles will be banned entirely by 2040. Which means that French families driving to the public square to watch infidel beheadings and gay people tossed from rooftops will have to drive there in electric cars. Germany, India, the Netherlands, and Norway have also set up time-tables to abolish internal combustion engines. This is all part of the left’s plan to starve Earth’s plant life of its vitally needed CO2 supply.

Don’t bother trying to explain to fascists that electric vehicles are an absolute catastrophe for the environment.  It’s not really about the environment, it’s about signaling to other environmental fascists how much they care about the environment.

Paris Agreement Sucked – No One Should Want It

Yesterday I wrote a lot of text on this. Thanks to all commenters who made helpful additions.

Today I want to give the short version. With short sentences. For lefties.

  • The Paris Agreement did not control CO2. It let China, India and Russia do what they wanted. Oooh, Russia! Bad!!!!1!! Right?
  • The Paris Agreement did not control CO2. Even the UN scienticians agreed that it made almost no difference to their Global Warming projected temperatures.
  • The Paris Agreement was a krazy-bad deal. It made the U.S. almost the only leading country that has to wreck its workers’ lives and futures.
  • The Paris Agreement was a krazy-bad deal. It made the U.S. almost the only leading country that has to give away many tens of billions of dollars annually, to pay Third World kleptocrats to hold back their countries.

Hey lefties: If you didn’t know these things, I’m sorry you’re so gullible.

I bet you’re gullible enough to think CNN or WaPo “fact checkers” are real, and not just fellow lefties trying to keep you on the plantation.

And, one more time: If Paris “imposes nothing on us” or is non-binding – then why should withdrawing from it be a crisis?

Think. If it’s true that any party can blow it off (note IF) – then it’s worthless, in yet another way.

The meaning of Trump’s presidency

With America’s withdrawal from the Paris climate accord, another piece of the puzzle is in place. I think I’m getting a Big Picture.

For a myriad of reasons – economic, financial, demographic – we have been moving into a multi-polar world. As opposed to a world where the U.S. is the one, super-wealthy super-power.

Like an oncoming glacier, the shift is very slow – but unstoppable. I’ve been contemplating it for years – and sometimes discussing it on the blog, as in my old posts (that I keep meaning to update) on the gradual decline of the U.S. dollar as the world’s central currency.

Trump is ahead of this shift, and left-wingers are behind it.

Despite their anti-American attitudes and railing against “white supremacy”, left-wingers take great comfort in the idea that the U.S. is the world’s one, super-wealthy super-power. In many a discussion, when I’ve tried to warn a liberal friend how policy X must inevitably undermine the U.S. position in the world, he or she smirks – yes, smirks – and says “But we will always be on top, because of reason Y.” (We have the best military, the best universities or tech research, Hollywood / the most seductive culture, control of the Internet or SWIFT payment system, whatever.)

I think their belief is basically infantile.

  • The child needs to fantasize that the parent is super-capable and benevolent and will always be there for her, no matter what.
  • And a malicious / narcissistic child fantasizes about being able to dish out endless tantrums and torture on the parent – without damaging the child’s life in any way.

Likewise, the left-winger needs to fantasize that the U.S. will always be the one, super-wealthy Super Mommy And Daddy – no matter how many rocks, bombs or burdens they (the left-wingers) throw at the U.S.

Which brings us to the Paris climate accord. It doesn’t do much of anything good. Just a couple big, bad things.

  1. Uphold left-wing fetishes – environmental extremism, statism, globalism – thus demonstrating leftie supremacy; and
  2. Drain the U.S. of wealth – in the form of payments for the Green Climate Fund, tens of billions of new aid to India and other countries, even more burdens on industry and U.S. energy, etc.

Withdrawing from the Paris agreement is so upsetting to left-wingers because it reverses both of those. Now, what is Trump’s rationale for withdrawing?

  • He thinks the U.S. is already responsible environmentally, and will continue to be.
  • He thinks we need to think a bit more about ourselves. We need to mine our own coal. We need to bring back manufacturing jobs. We need to NOT pay into the Green Climate Fund, billions of new aid to India, etc.
  • Meanwhile, the agreement lets China, India and even Europe burn coal and increase their CO2 emissions. That makes no sense. The agreement puts the U.S. at a senseless disadvantage.

Trump’s actions are consistent with, and helpful in, a multi-polar world where the U.S. stops being the Supreme Mommy and Daddy and instead, “gets real” about what the U.S. needs in order to be a good place to live for U.S. people.

He said it in January – “America First” – and now he’s carrying it out. That, and restoring the Constitution (at least a little). Because withdrawing from Paris de-fuses a constitutional bomb. (As will ending the Obamacare insurance-buying mandate, when they finally get around to that.)

Leftie reactions are telling: It’s the end of the world, the U.S. has “resigned as leader of the free world”, Germany’s Angela Merkel now leads the free world, etc. It’s exactly the tantrum you would expect them to throw – if they had an infantile attachment to an idea of the U.S. as the one, super-wealthy Super Mommy and Daddy, upon whom they could inflict any torture or burden that they pleased.

Trump is turning out to be the Bad Mouth Man who will end it, at least partly. And that’s good.

Making America Great Again

Yesterday afternoon’s big news, of course, is President Trump withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris climate accord.

Trump cited putting the “well being” of Americans first as a motivating factor behind his decision. He said, “This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund, which is costing the United States a vast fortune.”

…Compliance with the accord could have cost the U.S. “as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025 according to the National Economic Research Associates,” said Trump.

…Trump then pointed to a portion of the Paris Climate Agreement that he said allows China to increase their emissions for 13 years…adding that India made it’s participation in the Paris Accord “contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries.”

The Paris Agreement also essentially blocks U.S. development of clean coal, said Trump. He then said he was going to try to make it to the opening of a new mine in two weeks and noted “Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, so many places.”

…which voted for Trump in the election. Hmm, why?

Trump again pointed to China and India, saying that each country is allowed to add massive numbers of coal plants under the Paris Agreement.

“In short, the agreement doesn’t eliminate coal jobs, it just transfers those jobs out of America and the United States, and ships them to foreign countries,” he said. “This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States.”

I’ll be honest, I may be weak on the accord’s details. But I got the essence: It’s an orgy of left-wing, quasi-religious virtue-signalling that greatly damages the U.S. economy and sovereignty (because we entered it officially in 2016) while boosting globalist bureaucrats with U.S. money.

Reducing CO2 emissions is, of course, its stated reason for being; and not a very good reason. Even under the U.N.’s own (incorrect) climate models, the accord will do little to reduce actual CO2 emissions or future Global Warming projections. That makes it almost the definition of a bad deal: Big pain for small gain.

But it’s even worse because the U.N.’s climate models are broken and greatly overstate the danger of Global Warming. Thus, no matter how you slice it, the stated purpose (CO2) isn’t the real purpose. On the level of CO2, the accord accomplishes only a little toward solving an over-hyped, politically-constructed problem.

The real purpose is to be seen in the accord’s real effects: promoting globalism, U.N. bureaucracy, and the Left’s religions of Environmentalism and Statism, over and against human prosperity, human freedom (the ability to choose fossil fuels and/or products that rely on them, especially cars) and national sovereignty. And making the U.S. pay money for other countries.

As I survey the news this morning, I see the right people’s heads exploding and I gotta be honest: It feels good. Thank you, President Trump!

UPDATES:

  • From the comments, PMSNBC’s Chris Hayes has been tweeting “THE AGREEMENT QUITE LITERALLY IMPOSES NOTHING!!!” – to which people reply, “Then why is backing out such a big deal?”
  • Brouhaha over the withdrawal, as such. First: U.S. participation was never ratified by the Senate. And people justify that by saying “It’s an agreement, not a treaty.” Fine. Which then makes it 100% voluntary for each participating nation. Right?

    The brouhaha is in Article 28, which says basically that countries must give a 3+ year notice before their withdrawal can become effective. Thus, provided that we give a crap about Article 28, the U.S. can’t effectively withdraw until 2020.

    But remember: “It’s an agreement, not a treaty.” Thus, participation in Article 28 itself is inherently voluntary. Hopefully, Trump has canceled our participation in Article 28 – along with the rest.

  • Lots of good stuff at Breitbart.
  • Click here for Trump’s full speech.

Snowflakes Prove Again That Truth Melts Them

At Breitbart.com, James Delingpole savors the meltdown. Here’s the summary.

  • Bret Stephens, not all that much of a conservative firebrand, comes to the New York Times.
  • His first column suggests ever so gently that the Climate Changists may have over-hyped their case just a tad, making the public’s skeptical reactions just a bit understandable. He adds, “None of this is to deny climate change.”
  • Hilarity ensues.

You’ve seen the items about climate scienticians cancelling their NYT subscriptions. My favorite is German climate professor Stefan Rahmstorf, who compares his side to the heroes Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler facing the wrath of the Roman Church.

Why my favorite? Because it’s so delusional. Yes: Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler faced off against the religious, well-funded “scientific consensus” of their day. In our day, the Climate Changists ARE that religious, well-funded “scientific consensus”. Not the heroes challenging it.

As Delingpole concludes, Climate Change has become “a religion where heretics must burn.” Or even non-heretics, like Bret Stephens, who show heretics the tiniest crumb of understanding.

UPDATE: Steven Crowder hosts a real scientist, to talk climate change. They’re both smart guys and I found it informative.

Stefan Molyneux on “Climate Change”

I find Molyneux’s video-enlarged, ranting bald head a bit creepy. But his content is often brilliant. I recently listened to this one from 2015.

Molyneux proposes the following thought experiment:

  1. Suppose stockbrokers (or bankers or politicians or oil company CEOs – whomever you view as corruptible) are in charge of calculating some important measure of the world.
  2. Let’s call it the Economy Rate (ER). It could go up or down. The stockbrokers fudge and massage the ER data, as they see fit.
  3. First, the stockbrokers say “The ER is so important! and it’s going DOWN! That’s bad! Give us tens of billions of taxpayer money, and we’ll watch it and figure out what to do.”
  4. But over the years, the ER rises. The stockbrokers say “The ER is so important! and it’s going UP! That’s bad! Give us tens of billions of taxpayer money, and we’ll watch it and figure out what to do.”
  5. But then the ER stops going up. The stockbrokers say “The ER is so important! and it could go UP OR DOWN! With unpredictable pauses! That’s bad! Give us tens of billions of taxpayer money, and we’ll watch it and figure out what to do.”

At what point do you begin to see that the stockbrokers are taking you, in a racket?

  • Point 1 is climate scientists – who are a huge, publicly-funded industry. Each scientist profits (as wage/salary payments, benefits, etc.) from the grants she receives.
  • Point 2 is the world average temperature, which climate scientists derive from data that they themselves fudge and massage.
  • Point 3 is the 1970s, when climate scientists gave alarming predictions of a New Ice Age.
  • Point 4 is the 1980s to the 2000s, when their monster was Global Warming. The famous “hockey stick” upward graph.
  • Point 5 is recent years, when the “hockey stick” graph failed and they switched it to Climate Change – in whatever direction.

Do you believe that climate scientists are less corruptible than stockbrokers (or bankers or politicians or oil company CEOs)? That they’re somehow more objective and noble?

I don’t. You who do (lefties) have a RELIGIOUS FAITH in climate scientists, that you’re not admitting. And it’s exactly what climate scientists want you to have.

Your delusional, gullible faith is how they keep their tens of billions of taxpayer dollars coming. And of course they would have a “consensus” that they are objective and noble and deserve it and should be listened to and those dollars should keep coming. Of course they would.

Happy Earth Day!

Now we know what Trump is

A lot has happened in the last few weeks, to let us know what kind of president Trump is going to be.

He isn’t the new Hitler. And he isn’t the new Ronald Reagan. He’s Obama-Lite, or roughly what President Obama would have been if were saner and more authentically masculine and pro-American. (Like Obama, President Trump often talks about his own good intentions/hopes as if they were accomplishments.
They aren’t.) “The Swamp” and/or Deep State will stay in business for quite awhile yet. I suspect that Trump has cut some sort of deal with several of its important factions.

That still makes him 100 times better than Hillary.

Hillary would have done none of the above. On his own, Trump is not all that hot. But when compared to Hillary, he still is.

The Intersectionalities of Gender Dysphoria and Climate Change

These two, um, guys have a super serial point to make about Global Warming and its effect on, um, their ability to reproduce.

Screenshot-2017-01-25-at-17_29_42

“Our lives matter, climate change is real. Stop trying to deny it.” Climate deniers: “We are coming for you.”

The Crazies

Mark Steyn reports on the resignation of a Distinguished Climate Scientist, who can no longer tolerate the politicization of climate science.

Distinguished climate scientist Judith Curry [has] decided to resign from her position at Georgia Tech. [She elaborates on her reasons why.]

“The deeper reasons have to do with my growing disenchantment with universities, the academic field of climate science and scientists.

“A deciding factor was that I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment — funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc.

“How young scientists are to navigate all this is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide (I have worked through these issues with a number of skeptical young scientists).”

Climate Change is not about science, it is about politics. Climate Change is merely a vehicle for the left to advance its agenda of redistribution of wealth within the context of a planned, political economy. Some of the Climate Change activists admit this outright, but it is readily apparent to those capable of thinking critically. Every “solution” advanced by the Climate Change activists involves advancing the socialist, progressive agenda. Coincidence?

The comments from Climate Scienticians attacking Curry sound just like mean middle school girls attacking someone who doesn’t belong to their clique.

Curry is as dishonest as they come. Shes an attention seeker, whoring her credentials for adulation from angry old white men.

 

Climate Change Cultists Promise to Stop Lying About Fracking

Friends of the Earth have promised to stop spreading horrible lies about fracking …. not because they’ve suddenly embraced a philosophy of honesty and fair political discourse, but because they lost a lawsuit and are being forced to.

Friends of the Earth spent more than a year trying to defend its claims, which were made in a fundraising leaflet, but has been forced to withdraw them.

The authority found that Friends of the Earth (FoE) failed to substantiate claims that fracking could cause cancer, contaminate water supplies, increase asthma rates and send house prices plummeting.

How would the left advance any part of their agenda if they were prohibited from lying?

Danish Eco-Cultist Dreams of Green Socialist EUtopia

Ida Auken is a Danish Member of Parliament and former Environment Minister. Her aspiration and vision for the future would have her (and everyone else) living a monastic and child-like existence; with no possessions, no personal privacy, and no responsibilities.

Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes….

In our city we don’t pay any rent, because someone else is using our free space whenever we do not need it. My living room is used for business meetings when I am not there…

Everything is designed for durability, repairability and recyclability. The materials are flowing more quickly in our economy and can be transformed to new products pretty easily. Environmental problems seem far away, since we only use clean energy and clean production methods. The air is clean, the water is clean and nobody would dare to touch the protected areas of nature because they constitute such value to our well being

When AI and robots took over so much of our work, we suddenly had time to eat well, sleep well and spend time with other people. The concept of rush hour makes no sense anymore, since the work that we do can be done at any time. I don’t really know if I would call it work anymore. It is more like thinking-time, creation-time and development-time.

In short, her ambition is to be a child who would never grow up; all of her concerns taken care of by others while she is freed from the responsibility for doing anything she doesn’t feel like doing.

I guess it’s less depressing for Ida Auken to contemplate a future in a Pan-European Urbanist Eco-Socialist Utopia than one in which she’s forced into a burqa and beaten for going out in public without a male relative.

Let ‘Em Freeze in the Dark

The Environmentalist Extremists that run the state of Oregon have passed a law outlawing the use of coal to generate electricity.  They also oppose nuclear power. And they oppose hydroelectric power because dams are icky. Environmental Extremists have also successfully sued to prevent the development of wind power.

What does that leave? Oh, right solar power.

In Oregon.

Have you ever lived in Oregon? I have. Solar power is not exactly viable in a place where it rains, like, 270 days a year.

And they say conservatives are opposed to technological progress.

If only smug hippie liberalism could generate electricity, Oregon would look like Times Square.

(more…)

Progressive Democrats Against Energy, Commerce, and Civilization

The Portlandia City Council demonstrates the fanaticism and weapons-grade-stupidity of the Gaia Cult.

Portland’s city council unanimously approved a resolution Friday effectively preventing any new gas stations from being built.

The city’s resolution prevents the construction of new facilities to transport or store oil, gasoline, coal, and natural gas within Portland, Ore.

“Our work is not done yet, but we feel that with this unanimous vote, there is good chance that the codifying language is going to be strong and signal to the fossil fuel industry that Portland is not open for their business” Adriana Voss-Andreae, director of a local environmental group, told the left-wing news site Climate Progress.

Environmentalists claim the resolution is a huge victory over energy interests. Not passing the resolution would have been “apocalyptic” according to activists, because Portland is an important crossroad for the global energy trade and contains several oil refineries and pipelines.

Does anyone see, now, that the stereotype of the Democrat Left as anti-business, environmental extremist fanatics ia more than a little bit justified?

Moonbat Actor Demands Ban on Fossil Fuels

Mark Ruffalo plays a scientist in the Avenger movies; this, to the left, makes him an authority on science. He is now demanding that California ban all fossil fuels.

Actor and environmental activist Mark Ruffalo is calling on California Gov. Jerry Brown to end the state’s usage of fossil fuels for oil extraction and move to 100 percent renewable energy.

“This is really mankind’s greatest threat, and it should take some serious problem solving on all of our parts,” Ruffalo told the paper. “And we don’t really have to give up anything to do it.”

Nothing except warm homes, affordable food, reliable transportation, middle class jobs, and… oh, yeah, Freedom.

Nothing important.

Speaking of Hollywood Moonbats, Quentin Tarantino… who because he makes incredibly violent movies featuring criminals is regarded as an authority on matters of law and order… says that the police are “murderers.”

The “Pulp Fiction’’ director took part in an anti-cop rally less than a week after an officer was killed on the job.

“When I see murders, I do not stand by . . . I have to call the murderers the murderers,” the director — notorious for his violent movies — told a crowd of protesters in Washington Square Park on Saturday, adding that cops are too often “murderers.”

Nevertheless, when his new film opens, he will protected by these same “murderers,” and not representatives of the#BlackLivesMatter movement.

Happy Urf Day

Today (I think it’s today, not totally up on these things), the hippie left celebrates “Earth Day,” which was co-founded by a radical hippie environmentalist who murdered his girlfriend and composted her body.  You can honor Earth Day by starting a tire fire, or burning 9,180 gallons of jet fuel like the president did. They have roughly the same environmental impact.

This was making the rounds on Teh Facebooks earlier today:

Predictions made on the first Earth Day, 1970:

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” – George Wald, Harvard Biologist

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” – New York Times editorial, the day after the first Earth Day

“By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” – Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” – Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

“Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” – Life Magazine, January 1970

This is the same crowd assuring us that “Global Warming is real, it is caused by human activity. The science is settled!”

Then, as now, the solution was the same: Enact the progressive socialist agenda, submit to Government control, dismantle global enterprise.

Hippies.

YouTube Preview Image

California Priorities

California is a deep blue, one-party state where even the last “Republican” governor signed on to the Democrats’ reckless spending, Amnesty, and environmental extremism. The drought that is ravaging California has nothing to do with Global Warming, it’s just normal cyclical weather.  It has everything to do with environmental extremism and a political class that will spend $100Billion on a Train-to-Nowhere, but can’t find the money to develop a sustainable water infrastructure.

But the biggest problem in California is that the government has refused to build the reservoirs and dams necessary to actually save water when the rain does come. As the Wall Street Journal points out, Israel has weathered droughts for years. So has Arizona. Both built infrastructure. California has not, largely because politicians like Jerry Brown stopped such construction decades ago. The Wall Street Journal points out:

Money is not the obstacle. Since 2000 voters have approved five bonds authorizing $22 billion in spending for water improvements… desalination projects have been abandoned…

Because no sooner is an infrastructure project proposed than the Sierra Club and a hundred other Environmentalist Denominations file lawsuits demanding it be stopped. Environmentalists have actually put a measure on the ballot to dismantle existing water reservoirs. Environmentalism is a fundamentalist, extremist religion that says nothing should ever be built anywhere if it could potentially annoy wildlife. It’s not “NIMBY,” it’s “BANANA: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anybody.”

It also doesn’t help California’s problems that they flush 2.6 million acre-feet of usable water into the ocean because environmentalists are worried about their sacred fish.

(more…)

The Cult of Gaia Casts Shame Unto Sinners

Environmentalism is a religion of the Left, and one they are quite keen to use the Power of the State to convert and/or punish non-believers. Case in point, in Seattle WA … a state so manifestly leftist they have an open revolutionary socialist on their city council … those who sin against Gaia are… literally…. receiving scarlet letters.

In Seattle, wasting food will now earn you a scarlet letter — well, a scarlet tag, to be more accurate.

The bright red tag, posted on a garbage bin, tells everyone who sees it that you’ve violated a new city law that makes it illegal to put food into trash cans.

“I’m sure neighbors are going to see these on their other neighbors’ cans,” says Rodney Watkins, a lead driver for Recology CleanScapes, a waste contractor for the city. He’s on the front lines of enforcing these rules.

Yeah, one of the wonders of progressivism is the way it gives enough power to annoying busybodies to turn them into Der Kommissarr. One can only imagine the horrors that Rodney Watkins daydreams about inflicting on the sinners and heretics who offend Gaia with their filth and defiance.

plot1

“We have found a shameless harlot who doesn’t properly sort her recyclables; shall we burn her?”

Charles Koch Speaks

We allowed the Eich/Mozilla brouhaha to obscure this, but it addresses the same underlying problem: the fascist intolerance of the “progressive” Left.

Last week, one of the Koch brothers responded to Harry Reid’s outrageous attacks demonizing them:

Charles Koch: I’m Fighting to Restore a Free Society

Updated April 2, 2014 7:47 p.m. ET

I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.

Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation’s own government…[and] we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.

…In a truly free society, any business that disrespects its customers will fail, and deserves to do so. The same should be true of any government that disrespects its citizens. The central belief and fatal conceit of the current administration is that you are incapable of running your own life, but those in power are capable of running it for you…

More than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned that this could happen. “The natural progress of things,” Jefferson wrote, “is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” He knew that no government could possibly run citizens’ lives for the better. The more government tries to control, the greater the disaster, as shown by the current health-care debacle…

Instead of encouraging free and open debate, collectivists strive to discredit and intimidate opponents. They engage in character assassination. (I should know, as the almost daily target of their attacks.) This is the approach that Arthur Schopenhauer described in the 19th century, that Saul Alinsky famously advocated in the 20th, and that so many despots have infamously practiced…

…I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished…

He gives more, including some facts/details. (I’d reprint the article fully, except I haven’t obtained permission.) RTWT.

UPDATE: Also not to be missed is Kevin D. Williamson on The Liberal Gulag.

Welcome to the Liberal Gulag.

That term may be perverse, but it is not an exaggeration. Mr. [Adam] Weinstein [of Mother Jones] specifically called for political activists, ranging from commentators to think-tank researchers, to be locked in cages as punishment for their political beliefs. “Those denialists should face jail,” he wrote. “You still can’t” — banality alert! — “yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. You shouldn’t be able to yell ‘balderdash’ at 10,883 scientific journal articles a year.” “Balderdash” — a felony. At the risk of being repetitious, let’s dwell on that for a minute: The Left is calling on people to be prosecuted for speaking their minds regarding their beliefs on an important public-policy question that is, as a political matter, the subject of hot dispute. That is the stuff of Soviet repression.

And much more.