[timmac]

Power: As evidence discredits global warming, resistance to such facts by green elites reveals their real aim is bringing socialism in through the back door. But don't take our word for it. Listen to the climate change boss at the U.N.

Christiana Figueres, with the lumpy title of executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), came right out and said it: Democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. The really good model is communist China.

China is "doing it right," she told Bloomberg News Tuesday. "They actually want to breathe air they don't have to look at," she said with a straight face.

Maybe that's because for her information, China had breathed air it can see for decades under its command economy. Hot Air's Ed Morrissey points out that on the same day Figueres was praising China's top-down political system and denigrating democracies, China's capital, Beijing, was engulfed in a massive smog cloud that prompted authorities to order children, the sick and the elderly to stay inside.

Communist China has had one pollution crisis after another for decades. It's also the home to black rivers, polluted groundwater, destroyed lakes and some of the world's worst food standards — all fruits of a command economy where the public has no right to complain about anything because government knows best.

Morrissey notes that the same smog blighting China now was a problem five years ago, during the 2008 Olympics. Some sign of "doing it right."

The only thing clear here is the real motive of global warm-mongers. They're less interested in cleaning up the Earth than in controlling human beings in the name of "the common good" — just as the Bolsheviks once did, first in Russia, and then in China, where the tyranny continues to this day.

Global warming alarmists "want to change us, they want to change our behavior, our way of life, our values and preferences," according to a man who knows a thing or two about communist regimes, former Czech President Vaclav Klaus. In a speech to Australia's Institute of Public Affairs in 2011, he stressed:

"They want to restrict our freedom because they themselves believe they know what is good for us. They are not interested in climate. They misuse the climate in their goal to restrict our freedom. Therefore, what is in danger is freedom, not the climate."

Klaus, who fought communists all his life, admitted he may be "oversensitive." But "I am afraid that some of the people who spend their lives in a free society don't appreciate sufficiently all the issues connected with freedom. So my oversensitivity is like an alarm clock warning about the potential development, which I am really afraid of."

He pointed out that as global warming falls apart as a theory, its proponents grow more strident because their claim to power grows ever more tenuous.

"I feel threatened now, not by global warming — I don't see any — (but) by the global-warming doctrine, which I consider a new dangerous attempt to control and mastermind my life and our lives, in the name of controlling the climate or temperature."

"They don't care about resources or poverty or pollution. They hate us, the humans. They consider us dangerous and sinful creatures who must be controlled by them. I used to live in a similar world called communism. And I know it led to the worst environmental damage the world has ever experienced."

But that's of no concern to Ms. Figueres, princeling daughter of a former Costa Rican president who's lived a life of privilege since birth and is now badmouthing democracy and praising communist systems.

She condemned as "very detrimental" Congress' refusal to pass the U.N.'s climate change agenda even as evidence reveals global warming as a hoax and the U.N. agenda as a threat to America's economic well-being.

In the world she inhabits, the people's interests don't matter — neither in the United States nor in pollution-choked China. All that matters is control, her control. In modern times, the only ecosystem in which such people can effectively exist is a communist one.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/01/editorial-global-warming-back-door-to.html

[americandream]

There WILL NOT be socialism as objective dialectics contemplate an objective humankind. Any attempt to socialise capitalism through the lenses of the subjective WILL ALWAYS revert back to capitalism.

These are complex and subtle issues timmac, issues you are clearly not fully developed enough to understand, to understand the nature of social economy.

But rest assured, America will rule, along with Britannia, the global waves, in the meantime.

[jedrider]

I should say it is the FRONT DOOR to socialism. Either we have COLLECTIVE responsibility or we follow the quickest path to self-destruction. Communism and Capitalism once competed, but Communism didn't beat as quick a path to resource consumption as capitalism. This is why we buy our stuff from former communist countries now who have embraced capitalism.

[AgentR11]

The choice has already been made. We will consume, and burn, and waste, and build, and destroy... until it can be done no longer. The end result is, inevitable.

[timmac]

The choice has already been made. We will consume, and burn, and waste, and build, and destroy... until it can be done no longer. The end result is, inevitable.

But the end result will be a wonderful built infrastructure with no oil to keep it going, what's wrong with that.

Will have to go back to slaves to keep it together..

[Peak_Yeast]

This U.N. Socialism is fully described in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIoBrob3bjI

[AgentR11]

I don't get this concern over the UN; they are absolutely impotent, and if it were possible to be even more impotent than that, the beginning of the second cold war has pretty much sealed its fate.

The UN will be forcing nothing. If something in the US happens policy-wise that you don't like, blame the responsible parties, the president and the members of our legislature. They are 100% responsible for policy.

[ennui2]

This is exhibit A as far as us being behind two walls: denial, and ideological fundamentalism.

[Shaved Monkey]

BAU Capitalism needs cheap oil, cheap polluting,cheap labour,cheap resources to build cheap crap that needs to be bought and replaced as quickly as possible.
End result is more waste of resources, more pollution,more global warming to achieve more profits for a few.
A centralised government that doesnt have profit as the motivation can quickly put in place legislation and infrastructure to limit the wasteful use of resources.
Its always a balancing act to meet your citizens expectations and stay in power.
The American dream is a powerful mind controlling drug.
....and you know the opposing forces will be throwing everything at destabilising the system that will take away their access to more potential profits.

[PrestonSturges]

About 10 years ago I told my parents that if they ever start ranting like this, they are going straight into a nursing home with a bunch of Alzheimers patients babbling about how Roosevelt ruined the country. I think that because of conservative media there are probably lots of elderly people that have been locked away simply because they sound nuts.

[Sixstrings]

Well, we need a little bit of socialism. A little bit of socialism just means the rich don't have it all, there's a living wage, there's an economically healthy level of income distribution.

Like those horribly socialist 1960s, or 1970s. A bit of socialism means family vacations, maybe the mom can stay home and not have to work. A bit of socialism means we have far fewer billionaires and millionaires but you know what -- people didn't miss them did they, back in the 70s?

I'll go ahead and agree with Tinmac on the climate change part.

I've been hearing about climate change and the world ending for 30 years. Al Gore's houses, and carbon footprint, just keep getting bigger. He lied about NAFTA, too.

So there ya go, I'm an independent.

(don't throw anything at me, I'm still an environmentalist and for clean air and not cutting all the rainforest down so it's the same difference.)

[Lore]

I've been hearing about climate change and the world ending for 30 years. Al Gore's houses, and carbon footprint, just keep getting bigger. He lied about NAFTA, too.

Give it a few hundred years, as far as people go.

As for Al, I keep hearing this same ole story that he is somehow a hypocrite, but Gore has always been a capitalist. Al has never made any bones about it. He's promoted from the get-go that it's just as profitable to be green no matter what your financial condition is . Got a big house, put solar panels on it. Drive a fat cat car with a big honking gas gusling engine, get a Tesla. His philosophy, if you ever read his book, is that no matter your status everyone can reduce their footprint without reducing your lifestyle.

Personally, I don 't believe a real difference can be made unless we all reduce our lifestyle as well. That of course would be anti-capitalism.

[Subjectivist]

Dohboi, perfect example, point out the hypocrisy of Al Gore and the left dismisses those concerns without actually dealing with them at all.

[JV153]

Now, now pstarr.. China is going (has already?) through its greedy capitalist phase and is churning 4 x as much coal per annum as the US.. and Russia's 10 mb/d oil production is nothing to sneeze at either.

[Tanada]

Now, now pstarr.. China is going (has already?) through its greedy capitalist phase and is churning 4 x as much coal per annum as the US.. and Russia's 10 mb/d oil production is nothing to sneeze at either.

That is a massive understatement if anything. What the USSR lacked in consumers they made up for in nearly vacant land that could be mined or deforested at will without anyone much noticing outside of the local neighborhood. Add in the fact that to travel inside the old USSR you needed an internal passport and papers specifying where and when you were allowed to travel. Such things make it very easy to keep the bulk of the population completely in the dark about the resource extraction taking place.

[JV153]

That is a massive understatement if anything. What the USSR lacked in consumers they made up for in nearly vacant land that could be mined or deforested at will without anyone much noticing outside of the local neighborhood.

You're not suggesting some other country is embarking on a similar tack ?

[Tanada]

That is a massive understatement if anything. What the USSR lacked in consumers they made up for in nearly vacant land that could be mined or deforested at will without anyone much noticing outside of the local neighborhood.

You're not suggesting some other country is embarking on a similar tack ?

Today Germany and the UK are buying up massive quantities of wood pellets from Canada. Canada is producing much of those wood pellets by reducing the vast number of square kilometers of Taiga Forest that currently exist in that country. This madness in the name of 'biofuel' should be ended right now, but there is a profit in it for the Canadian Lumbering companies and the EU/UK power stations that buy the 'biofuel' and get big tax incentives for being 'green'.

[JV153]

Tanada,

I had no idea. You're not the only person I've heard make a similar comparison between those two countries.
.. ah, I see now. Yes, well, I suppose that is a broad area.