Channel
surfing one day, I found a “documentary” produced in 2011 that captured my
attention. The breathtaking photography, the music, the powerful narrative, and
the clever editing would have made a convert out of me, had I been a low-information
American who believed everything MSM said, factoids repeated at nauseam and
coated with a veneer of veracity. When Hollywood hypocritical elites are the messengers
and the pop culture icons speak, millions follow what they say with blind
devotion and adoration devoid of rational thought.
The
theme was “addiction to money” but the subtle topic was global environmentalism
through U. N. Agenda 21. Economist and author David McWilliams presented the scenario
of reengineering a sustainable
economy and why it was necessary.
The
film starts in Copan, Honduras, panning over the remains of the Mayan
civilization, a city of 27,000 people, a thriving civilization for many years.
“It overstretched,” said the narrator, implying that the west will suffer the
same fate unless globalists intervene and re-engineer it on the path to sustainability. The Australian film criticizes
United States in particular, the thorn in the side of the globalists.
The
Mayans fatal flaw that doomed them was “cutting down the forest.” It would have
been honest to say that the Mayans did not know forest management, ran out of
an important resource at the time, “sowing the seeds of their own destruction.”
Professor
Paul Ehrlich, ecologist and climatologist from Stanford, is quoted throughout
the film, exposing what a former VP termed, the “inconvenient truth.” Here are
some examples:
-
“Eastern
Islanders did the same thing, cut down all the trees and wound up eating each
other”
-
“For
the first time with globalization, we are facing collapse of everything”
-
“We
are done with fossil fuels, we are done with automobiles, most Americans may
have bought their last car”
-
“If
we continue on the long range energy course that we are on, sooner or later we
will melt the polar ice caps and we will be swimming around, at least in the
coastal areas” (Sydney, 1971)
-
“What
do we do about the current economic problem so that it does not lead to a
social collapse?”
-
“How
do we move to a sustainable civilization?”
If
one explores other statements by Paul Ehrlich, it is evident what he considers
social collapse, sustainable civilization, and who decides the definition. For
example, “Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of
giving an idiot child a machine gun.” Another example, “A cancer is an
uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an
uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the
treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will
demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
Could
we suffer the Mayans fate, since “the system that sustained us is in ruins?” The
camera pans cleverly over pumping oil wells, assembly line cars in Detroit, and
Wall Street. He blames the principal “architect” Alan Greenspan, for creating “an
economic philosophy that has completely failed.”
Never
mind that this failed system has created wealth beyond anybody’s dreams, millionaires,
billionaires, and has improved the standard of living of billions around the
globe. Yet the insatiable greed of six billion people who want to live better is
going to destroy the planet. “The environment is under unsustainable assault.”
The
financial crisis caused the wealthy endowments of many Ivy League schools to
lose billions of dollars. “They were not wise, they were in fact, quite
stupid,” said Robert Reich. Oxford lost more than 100 million pounds.
Economists, bankers, regulators were wrong and “did not see this coming.” This
is not true, most knew this was coming.
The
technocrats of EU have moved to salvage their union by allowing the largest Cypriot
bank to collapse and by confiscating 40 percent of everyone’s deposits
exceeding 100,000 euros. What rights do socialist technocrats (bent on re-engineering
the economies of 27 nations) have to the depositors’ money in order to salvage
the poorly run socialist Cypriot economy is a very good question.
“The
future is going to look very different from the past.” True, but the question is, will the future be
“fundamentally” altered by globalists’ re-engineering intervention, or will it
be a future resulting from normal change.
The
future will be violent and angry when jobs disappear. Robert Reich said, “The
blame game can be very attractive when people are hurting.” Did we not lose
millions of jobs in the U.S. in the last four years and none are being created
in the foreseeable future except “green jobs?” I did not see any anger and hurt,
just 99 weeks of unemployment benefits.
The
price of energy has gone through the roof, especially oil, as China and India
are buying more cars. Did the current administration not stop the Keystone XL
pipeline that would have brought cheaper oil from the tar sands in Canada? Did
they not put a moratorium on domestic drilling in the Gulf of Mexico while
allowing Brazil and other foreign countries to drill? Did the EPA not reject
the building of new refineries and nuclear plants in the U.S.?
We
are going to fight in the future over food and water since it reached its
limits. “The global economy cannot grow in this model.” We have to adopt the
environmentalists’ model of sustainability to save ourselves. We are running
out of everything because there are too many people on the planet, “60 million
more each year,” McWilliams said.
In
Malthusian fashion, the narrator warns that the most “terrifying’ of all future
prospects is a “climate that is changing so rapidly that we have no time to
adapt to it because we are pressing against the limits of the planet to sustain our civilization.” Climate and
weather are two different things, not interchangeable, but low information
viewers are easily persuaded.
Professor
Robert Solow describes how “we did not run the society very well” in the 20th
century and thus we must rethink how we do things – “that is the advantage of a
crisis that we do not want to waste.” Where did we hear that before, a crisis
is a terrible thing to waste? Is it not the modus operandi of the current
administration?
“A
crisis gives us the reason to change everything, we cannot continue as before.”
The common denominator of all our problems is energy, cheap energy that fuels
our economy. We burn too much oil, a giant supertanker every twenty minutes.
“We have to redesign our economy around people, not around automobiles,” said Ehrlich.
Who gave him the mandate to redesign the economy and why does it need to change
to suit his opinions?
Apparently,
we have reached the point of no return, oil supplies are going to decline and,
according to a BP oil executive and activist, we are going to run out of oil in
30-40 years at the current levels of oil use. China and India will have more
cars than America and oil is going to be very expensive. How can a low-knowledge
person argue with such a definitive and scary statement? Yet huge sources of
oil have been discovered around the globe.
We
are such “resource junkies,” that we are craving one last hit from an ever more
scarce resource that has been polluting our environment and destroying Mother
Earth.
Electric
cars will “save us from an addiction to oil, for which we are mortgaging all of
our assets.” But changing to electric cars is not enough, says the documentary.
We
have to re-engineer agriculture as well, the next item on the environmentalist
agenda because it is not sustainable.
We use too much fuel, too much fertilizer, “we are effectively eating fossil
fuels.”
We
consume more grain than it is produced, reducing stockpiles of rice, wheat, and
corn by 40 percent since 2002. The documentary fails to describe how droughts
and the use of grain as biofuels have reduced the supply of food in poor
countries. Riots took place as a result of doubling of rice and corn prices.
Environmentalists are responsible for pushing the use of grains as biofuels.
“We
have a world in which you have a relatively few incredibly rich people and huge
numbers of poor people, getting more hungry and desperate and we must do
something about that,” says Ehrlich. Rich people again are at fault that
starvation resulted from an ill-designed biofuel energy policy by the very
groups who claim that fossil fuels are not sustainable.
“We’ve
spent billions bailing out banks and car companies, but peanuts securing food
supplies,” laments McWilliams. Do we not give food aid to third world countries
all the time?
As
China loses more land to urban development, food prices will go “through the
roof.” If China changes its tastes from rice to meat, the price of meat would
double, the narrator predicts. Meat is also not sustainable because animals pollute the environment and use too
much water.
China
is building 3 gorge dam projects, rivers around the world are running dry, and
by “2025 three billion people will suffer water shortages.” Which is it, are
our shores going to flood and water will cover islands around the globe due to
polar ice caps and glaciers melting, or are we going to have a severe manufactured
water shortage?
The
world’s finite resources will cause unstoppable migration, wars over land,
food, and water. Parading a throng of low information citizens, the common cause
identified for all the ills enumerated is GREED, the greed of the rich who
stole everything from the rest of us.
We
have to fundamentally change. Capitalism is bad, unregulated markets are bad,
governments are financially and morally bankrupt and not trustworthy. FDR was
the only president who had the courage to confront the banking oligarchy.
American taxpayers saved the banks from the “huge losses they made.”
Actually,
Carter’s Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 had a lot of to do with the
worthless mortgages – it changed the dynamics of lending and borrowing. Realtors
were eager to sell to people who did not qualify for loans, buyers were eager
to buy what they could not afford but felt entitled to, and banks bundled good
loans with bad loans to reduce losses and then sold them to unsuspecting
investors.
There
are 41,000 lobbyists in Washington who force the agenda of the U.S. government.
Nothing happens in D.C. without lobbyists. “The threat to democracy by business
and financial lobbyists is profound,” said Robert Reich, former Labor
Secretary. I believe that out of control spending (generational theft),
resulting in the increase of the national debt by $6 trillion in four years, is
the biggest threat to our national security.
The
documentary suggests that the resolution of problems, the ageing population,
migration issues, global warming, the coming wars over oil, water, and food
rests with the merging of the “Mean and the Green,” forcing Wall Street to
support the environmentalist cause (global warming) and to finance the “green
economy.”
There
is a potential $10 trillion electric car industry, with China’s BYD as the leader
and the largest car maker in the world by 2025. How do they propose to generate
electricity for these cars since wind and solar power are not enough? A
different type of nuclear power plant will be the solution if the Chinese are
successful.
Our
“addiction to money” and a better standard of living will put the planet in
peril unless we fundamentally change. Professor Ehrlich has been warning us
since 1971 and we have not been paying significant attention. Unfortunately, globalists
will re-engineer us on the path to sustainability.
It may require the reduction in global population to a manageable size of 1
billion because the existence of the other 5 billion is unsustainable and inconvenient to the resource environmentalist
planners.
I
have described in my book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy,” (http://www.amazon.com/U-N-Agenda-21-Environmental-ebook/dp/B009WC6JXO/ref=sr_1_1_title_0_main?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1364404317&sr=1-1&keywords=un+agenda+21+environmental+piracy) all the ways
and venues by which globalists will fundamentally change every facet of our
lives but the question remains, will the low information citizens pay attention
and learn quickly that everything they like to do and cherish is going to be
labeled unsustainable?
No comments:
Post a Comment