Climate Change Crisis: It's All About Control

Every collectivist revolution rides in on a Trojan horse of 'emergency'. It was the tactic of Lenin, Hitler, and Mussolini. In the collectivist sweep over a dozen minor countries of Europe, it was the cry of men striving to get on horseback. And 'emergency' became the justification of the subsequent steps. This technique of creating emergency is the greatest achievement that demagoguery attains.

--Herbert Hoover, 31st US President

In the grand scheme of things, humans are a rather pathetic lot. Among God's creatures, they are neither the strongest, nor the fastest, nor the most ferocious. In self-defense they boast neither camoflage, nor armor, nor poisonous venom. They have no wings to soar above the heavens. They cannot swim the ocean depths. They are naked against the cold, and oppressed by the heat. Even the tiniest microbe or virus can fell them. Save for their intellect (or what sometimes passes for it), humans are a pretty helpless bunch.

Mazlow's hierarchy of needs suggests how humans seek to get some control into their lives. First, they seek control by addressing their basic needs for survival: breathing, food, water, sleep, etc. Then they seek more control by looking after their safety: shelter, employment, resources, health and property. They seek more control by establishing relationships: friendships, family, sexual, membership in clubs, societies or gangs. Then they seek to control how they are viewed by others: by developing self-esteem, pursuing respect, achievements, recognition, or acquiring expensive goods.

Finally, Mazlow would have us believe that humans ultimately attempt to achieve "self-actualization" -- that is, becoming the "best one can be"; fulfilling one's personal dreams. This last one is more difficult as it can be different for each person. For some it might be achieved through creativity, for example: art, music, theater, or photography. For others it might be achieved through problem solving, such as: science, mathematics, technology, invention. But for some, it can only be achieved through the continued acquisition of power (ie, ultimate control) whether financial, political, corporate, military, or a combination thereof.

Throughout history, humans have sought control. They have sought control by harnessing fire and domesticating animals. They have sought control by seeking the favor of the gods. They have sought control through witchcraft and sorcery. They have sought control by building pyramids, castles, and 'great walls'. They have sought control over disease. They have sought control over ignorance. They have sought control over morality. They have sought control over their enemies. They have sought control over public opinion. They have sought control over their fellow human beings.

And so, the 'Global Warming' or 'Global Climate Change' CRISIS is simply another human effort to control. The naive would have us believe that it is about control of the climate. But in reality, it is nothing more than a manufactured crisis which is part of a more sinister plot to impose a form of socialism on the entire planet. Its proponents say the time for debate is over because there is a "consensus" of scientists supporting it. They highlight the fact that the UN's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) boasted 2500+ scientific expert reviewers, 800+ contributing authors, and 450+ lead authors from 130+ countries on its 4th Assessment Report in 2007. Meanwhile, nearly 32,000 scientists (9,000 with Ph.Ds) have signed the Oregon Petition disputing the "established truth" of global-warming. Thus, the "consensus" argument rings a bit hollow.

To deflect criticism away from the flawed science of global-warming, the socialist elite employs the ranks of their friends in the mainstream media to help make the case for them. The media generally describes the case for man-made global-warming as if it is a fact, rather than an unproven theory. They have even gone so far as to prejudice their stories...

The news media promote global warming alarmism through selective reporting. Dr. Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado noted that a paper published in an obscure scientific journal that argued there was a link between hurricanes and global warming generated 79 news articles, while a paper that debunked the connection published in a far more prestigious journal generated only three.

--Jack Kelly, "Media Promotes Global Warming Alarmism", January 8, 2008

To divert attention from their lack of consensus, they mock legitimate scientists who question the veracity of man-made global-warming by labeling them as "deniers", as if to associate them with the ludicrous deniers of the holocaust. They use high profile liberals like former Vice President Al Gore to make their case with glitzy productions which envision worst-case scenarios.

And when Al Gore's production of 'An Inconvenient Truth' was determined to be full of statements that were "one-sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative or wrong", the socialist elite naturally rewarded Al Gore by giving him an Academy Award and a Nobel Peace Prize. Gore was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Heidi Sørensen, a member of the Norwegian parliament for the Socialist Left Party (SV). Interestingly enough, the UN's IPCC (a political rather than scientific organization) shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.

As President Hoover warned, an 'emergency' is the "Trojan Horse" which collectivists use to attain power. And the Climate Change Gestapo are the worst form of collectivists. They want to control you for the "good of mankind", for the "good of the planet". They want to control how you live, the temperature on your thermostat, how much "carbon" you are allocated, what kind of light bulbs you can use, and what type of car you can drive. What does it matter if compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) cost more? You MUST pay the price, in the name of mankind. What does it matter if hybrid or hydrogen-powered vehicles cost more? You MUST pay the price, for the good of the state... excuse me, the PLANET. These socialists WANT you to pay high gas prices, so it will change your behavior.

And God forbid that some countries should use more energy than others. There's a discrepancy there. That's not fair! So the Climate Change Politburo will correct that situation. They have created international "regulations" under the auspices of the UN on how much CO2 can be produced. Those regulations can be found in international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. Although the US has not yet ratified the Kyoto Protocol, it is conceivable that an Obama presidency would push for ratification. It should be pointed out that Kyoto is underwritten by governments, but is governed by global legislation enacted under the UN’s aegis.

It is also likely that an Obama presidency will impose a carbon tax. And this tax of course, will be paid by you, the consumer. However, the carbon tax advocates assure us that such a tax would be "progressive", that is, "the wealthy will pay more" -- another strategy right out of the liberal-socialist playbook.

And oh, by the way, you can't have any more energy -- you'll just have to get by with less, and pay dearly for the privilege. Just listen to the arguments of the socialists... Drilling for oil will not reduce the price of gasoline in the short-term, therefore we shouldn't drill for anymore oil. Nuclear energy is not the answer, therefore we shouldn't build any nuclear plants. In their view, the answer lies completely in solar, wind, and geothermal. Yet, I have not seen too many solar-powered automobiles, or wind-powered 18-wheelers, or geothermal-powered railroad trains that appear to be viable. And I don't happen to buy the notion that...

We need to power down and prepare for a different kind of existence than we have known for nearly a century. This does not mean we necessarily need to "tend sheep." It does mean using ingenuity to live in harmony with nature vs. plundering and poisoning this home we share.

--Eric Teegarden, "Nuclear Power Is Not The Answer", June 3, 2008

So where will all those carbon tax dollars go? Well, to the poorest countries of course who need the dollars more than you do. It is the ultimate form of socialism: "From each nation according to its ability, to each nation according to its need". American carbon tax dollars will go to poor countries through a proposed UN tax on Americans called the Global Poverty Act. Senator Barack Obama, the most left-wing of the liberals in the US Senate, is proposing that the US pays a tax to the United Nations in an effort to eliminate Global Poverty.

Apparently the "War on Poverty" fiasco was before Obama's time. So then, he who has failed to learn from history is doomed to repeat it. Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of its gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends on foreign aid. Again, this tax will be paid by you, the American consumer and taxpayer. It is merely another step in the road to global socialization.

But somehow, I suspect that not all of those tax dollars will actually get to those poor countries. Some of it will no doubt be siphoned off along the way by the UN Climate Change Direktors or the UN Poverty Eradikators -- as a management fee, naturally. And more of it will be stolen by the leaders of the countries those dollars are intended to help. The UN's Oil-For-Food Program is a good example of how well such international programs can be managed. It is no different than the two-tier arrangement which existed in the Soviet Union. Although according to Marxist theory, everyone was supposed to have "equal income", Communist party leaders somehow found a way to make sure they received a bit more...

What was most striking was people’s dissatisfaction with the communist system. The main complaint was against the inequalities within the system. People claimed that the Soviet Union had a two class system. The ruling class were officials of the Communist Party. Everybody else were members of the second class (the same thing was said when I was in China). People pointed out the differences in goods that existed in shops set aside for party officials and foreign tourists with those available for the rest of the population.

--John Simkin, History Teacher, Brighton, Sussex, May 30, 2004

So why then, should we expect anything less from a cabal of socialist elitists who are using the Climate Change "crisis" to gain power on a global scale. Václav Klaus, the second President of the Czech Republic and a former Prime Minister of the Czech Republic (1992 – 1997), said it best in a Financial Times article...

The author Michael Crichton stated it clearly: “the greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda”. I feel the same way, because global warming hysteria has become a prime example of the 'truth versus propaganda' problem. It requires courage to oppose the “established” truth...

As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This (ambitious environmentalism) ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.

--Václav Klaus, "Freedom, Not Climate, Is At Risk", June 13, 2008

And if perhaps you believe that Václav Klaus is somewhat paranoid, then consider that there are people and organizations that are covertly working towards global government, and have been for many years. As we can see from the following quote, such organizations are working towards a "super-state" organization, and they recognized early the need to influence "popular education" in the process...

The sovereignty fetish is still so strong in the public mind, that there would appear to be little chance of winning popular assent to American membership in anything approaching a super-state organization. Much will depend on the kind of approach which is used in further popular education.

--Council on Foreign Relations, "American Public Opinion and Postwar Security Commitments", 1944

Have you been educated yet? Have you learned the "truth" about global-warming? Have you been trained to believe that we are facing a "crisis"... an "emergency"? Of course you have, Comrade Citizen.

This technique of creating emergency is the greatest achievement that demagoguery attains.

--Herbert Hoover, 31st US President