People often say “they’re a Nazi” in order just to mean they are immoral, but following a comment I read on a forum, I want to discuss instead whether the modern green movement might be more like the Nazi in their philosophy, propaganda techniques and general politics than most people would care to admit.
Left Wing
It’s often a favourite past time of the left to liken anyone on the right to the Nazis – no doubt because the left-wing were against Hitler and so they assume the German Nazis must be right wing. But even a cursory glance at the history of the Nazis tells us they were the “National Socialist Party”. (Not to be confused with the similar sounding & initials of the Scottish Nationalist Party).
Fascist
Second, the Nazis were undoubtedly fascist: bypassing democratic procedures forcing through dictate. However, anyone that’s seen the unconstitutional way the EPA (Energy impoverishment Agency?) in the US can’t help seeing the similarity to the Nazis. Because like the Nazis, the EPA are bypassing democracy. They have used legislation designed to control actual pollution to control energy, which in effect means they now control all production, all food, all dwellings, all (also) water – indeed given their undemocratic and unconstitutional behaviour it is only a small step for them to pass rules to prohibit various “unnecessary” parts of the internet as “causing pollution”.
The reality is that the EPA have redefined “pollution” to mean anything they don’t like. So whilst CO2 is good for plants, it is now a “pollution”. Likewise, anything else “harmful” (meaning they don’t like it) could be deemed a pollutant.
Thus, by this word-play they are able to bypass the constitution to give themselves the power to prohibit anything they don’t like. AKA fascism.
And of course, “Greens” aren’t really “green”. Rising CO2 is causing a greening on the planet. If these people were green, they would be celebrating the benefit of CO2 on plants globally. Instead, their politics means they are against everything and anything that gets in the way of forcing everyone to accept their views – including nature itself!
So, e.g. in our local nature reserve, an indigenous tree species in a wood that has been there over 100 years was cut down because the eco-fascists deemed the area to be “bogland”. And once these nutters have deemed an area “polluted by nature” – they will just destroy nature.
Pro- “hi tech/science”, anti simple engineering
One of the great divides in the war was a philosophical one about technology. In Britain and the US, we had the view that “the best technology which was not yet available was not as good as the second best that was available”. So, e.g. we focussed on producing Spitfires and other air-planes with a proven history of working reliably. In contrast, the Germans tried “inventing” new solutions: rockets like the U2, Jet planes & the atomic weapon.
And we won the war largely because Germany wasted its energy on “hi-tech” solutions and the UK and US focussed on workable solutions: like effective planes and not new weapons; workable radar technology and not “death rays” and that we rejected academically inspired crazy schemes like the “Bounding bomb” (tried once and never used again).
And then what happened?
The US and to a lesser extent the UK, picked up a lot of the German technology & Nazi scientists. With our practical engineering approach, we got the new technology working, we then created agencies like NASA – who then adopted the failed German philosophy of “new/hi-tech is better” (perhaps because so many Germany scientists went to NASA).
Post war, the “science” community first convinced government to spend massive amounts on them, and then finally having become a massive propaganda machine in its own right, they told government to get rid of engineering and manufacture (under Thatcher e.g. the Science and Engineering committee became just Science and Technology … a clear victory to the Nazi “high tech/science on a pedestal” philosophy.)
… and we finally got to “invented here … made in Japan (now China).
And it appears fortunate for Germany that we took all these “mad scientists” from her. Because Germany was then free to learn their lesson from the war and so it adopted the successful allied approach of “simple good engineering”. Half a century later, the “hi-tech/science” post war philosophy of the UK and US were leading to a collapse of manufacturing with production moving to … guess who? Germany and Japan!
Germany might have won the war … but by ditching itself of the “scientists” with the U2 obsession and giving then to the US to form NASA … they won the peace! But isn’t in reality “green” just a reformulation of this “high-tech/science” philosophy.?
First, it obviously places “scientists” on some kind of pedestal and despite all their failings on climate, they remain there in the eyes of greens.
And second, what is “alternative technology” other than technology which is not commercially viable, which is loved by the greens because it appear “hi-tech”? Even the very language screams it! So e.g. in much of the world windmills are still “Vindmolle” or just machines.
But to the engineering-industrial-machine hating greens, they are not windmills but “wind turbines”: white shiny things that look “hi-tech”. And what is the most favoured technology of the greens=gullible? Solar! Not simple solar as used to heat hot water which can often pay for itself without subsidy, but shiny “high tech” PV solar which has contributed more CO2 through its production than it is ever likely to save. Like the Nazis, greens are obsessed with this shiny “hi-tech” which like the Nazis, they think will save their Utopian ideas from reality.
Green Propaganda
Finally, I wanted to examine the propaganda philosophy of the greens. Most people have heard of “Goebels big lie” approach to propaganda. His view was that if you told a lie big enough often enough, then sooner or later people would accept it was true. Likewise, we see the same approach used by modern eco-fascists. For example:
- That warmth is bad (20x more deaths globally are due to cold rather than heat)That CO2 is a pollutant (CO2 is a plant food and rising levels are greening the planet)That 20th century warming was “unprecedented”. (The Central England Temperature record shows that 20th century warming was quite normal.That scientists can predict the climate (It is difficult to think of even one thing that scientists have not correctly predicted about the climate)And last but not least … the Lewandowsky approach of continually lying about sceptics, the similar and equally immoral lies about sceptics being “in the pay of big oil”. The truth is that sceptics are far better qualified than almost all greens to talk about energy and climate and all BIG OIL companies have their snouts in the trough on public money on wind energy.
The Nazis were the first “green” party
I need do little more than quote this excellent article: NAZI GREENS – An Inconvenient History
Two disturbing stories recently on the greens. First Spiegel magazine runs an article on the rise of extremist right-wing environmentalism in Germany. Then The Observer newspaper reveals that, in the name of preventing ‘climate change’, British aid money to India is paying for the forced sterilisation of poor people. These are shocking stories. But not so shocking to those familiar with the story of Nazi environmentalism. Let’s step back in time.
Picture the scene. At the edge of a forest, German soldiers point their guns at rows of naked people who follow the Jewish religion. Among them are young mothers clutching their babies. The shots echo through the woods and the dead bodies fall into the ground. Down the road, while this is happening, their German army comrades are busy establishing nature walks and bird sanctuaries and planting trees. The Nazis conducted horrific experiments on children (I have seen footage so upsetting it can’t be shown on TV) but at the same time they banned medical experiments on animals. The same Nazi monsters who committed crimes of unimaginable barbarity also advocated vegetarianism, organic agriculture, forest preservation and homeopathic healthcare. How can we possibly explain this? What was the connection between the inhuman brutality of the Nazis and their gushing idealization of ‘Nature’?
Nazism could so easily happen again
As I grew up, one of the big questions we asked was “how could the German people have let it happen”. I couldn’t understand how ordinary Germans could ever have supported the Nazis. But now having experienced eco-fascism first hand, watching the EPA in the US, and seeing the hate campaign of modern eco-fascists climate extremists, it is very easy to see how it could and did happen.
I now realise I was in effect lied to by the left-wing post labour governments and the left wing BBC and the general propaganda machine of the left, who falsely characterised the Nazis as “right wing”. They were no more ring wing than e.g. Stalin was socialist. Both Stalin and Hitler embraced socialism and both embraced authoritarian policies (like the EPA).
That may now seem irrelevant, but the danger now is that by falsely characterising the Nazis as “right wing”, we have left the back door open to the real modern Nazis. Because society is falsely looking for “Nazis” on the right, we are not aware of the growing fascism on the “green” left (which is where the the “National socialists” came from).
