UK to sell forests to fight global warming

Just another obvious example of the true agenda behind climate fear mongering.

Control of resources by authoritarians masquerading as envriomentalists
 
The warmers will buy any scam and the globalists get a kick out of leading them where no sane person would allow. This is proof. the tree huggers are so brainwashed they'll allow their ancient forests to be raped as long as it's in the name of fighting the great Global Warming. LOL it's getting hilarious. And when you show people the writings of IPCC panel members that advocate a scientific dictatorship, they call you a nutter and tell you to seek help.

Here's a link you should all read
http://www.abc-clio.com/product.aspx?id=56855

David Shearman is an IPCC panel member and co-author of this book

Blames the operation of liberal democracy for its inability to make the tough decisions necessary to stabilize climate change and provide a sustainable society.

Climate change threatens the future of civilization, but humanity is impotent in effecting solutions. Even in those nations with a commitment to reduce greenhouse emissions, they continue to rise. This failure mirrors those in many other spheres that deplete the fish of the sea, erode fertile land, destroy native forests, pollute rivers and streams, and utilize the world's natural resources beyond their replacement rate. In this provocative book, Shearman and Smith present evidence that the fundamental problem causing environmental destruction—and climate change in particular—is the operation of liberal democracy. Its flaws and contradictions bestow upon government—and its institutions, laws, and the markets and corporations that provide its sustenance—an inability to make decisions that could provide a sustainable society.

Having argued that democracy has failed humanity, the authors go even further and demonstrate that this failure can easily lead to authoritarianism without our even noticing. Even more provocatively, they assert that there is merit in preparing for this eventuality if we want to survive climate change. They are not suggesting that existing authoritarian regimes are more successful in mitigating greenhouse emissions, for to be successful economically they have adopted the market system with alacrity. Nevertheless, the authors conclude that an authoritarian form of government is necessary, but this will be governance by experts and not by those who seek power. There are in existence highly successful authoritarian structures—for example, in medicine and in corporate empires—that are capable of implementing urgent decisions impossible under liberal democracy. Society is verging on a philosophical choice between liberty or life. But there is a third way between democracy and authoritarianism that the authors leave for the final chapter. Having brought the reader to the realization that in order to halt or even slow the disastrous process of climate change we must choose between liberal democracy and a form of authoritarian government by experts, the authors offer up a radical reform of democracy that would entail the painful choice of curtailing our worldwide reliance on growth economies, along with various legal and fiscal reforms. Unpalatable as this choice may be, they argue for the adoption of this fundamental reform of democracy over the journey to authoritarianism.
 
tom prendergast said:
Well considering that you are a fairly right wing character, I find it odd that you are using a blog in the Guardian, a left wing paper, to substantiate the claim.
Click to expand...

The small minds of some Americans are coming to the fore on this one. This is an ideological decision NOT, NOT, NOT a plan to save the environment or anything else. NOT, NOT, NOT to rescue the economy but simply a Tory scheme to reduce the governments responsibility and place even more profits in the hands of the private land owners, who, to a man (or faceless conglomerate) are Tories through and through. Are they going to sell off King William's private hunting ground in the New Forest?
Well, the UK has accepted the crap that millionaire brat, Osborne has fed them (sorry Tom) and accepted the downright lies from Clegg and Cameron.
To label those that oppose this, 'Tree Huggers' is EXACTLY what the Tories wanted.
We are well into an era in which labelling can win wars.
 
Lowaicue said:
The small minds of some Americans are coming to the fore on this one. This is an ideological decision NOT, NOT, NOT a plan to save the environment or anything else. NOT, NOT, NOT to rescue the economy but simply a Tory scheme to reduce the governments responsibility and place even more profits in the hands of the private land owners, who, to a man (or faceless conglomerate) are Tories through and through. Are they going to sell off King William's private hunting ground in the New Forest?
Well, the UK has accepted the crap that millionaire brat, Osborne has fed them (sorry Tom) and accepted the downright lies from Clegg and Cameron.
To label those that oppose this, 'Tree Huggers' is EXACTLY what the Tories wanted.
We are well into an era in which labelling can win wars.
Click to expand...

For someone who lives in the Hong Kong which is about as capitalist as it is possible to get, you do hold some extraordinary class warrior views at times. Can you really see the Libs Dems, who are tree huggers to a man/woman, allowing this to go through?
 
Last edited:
tom prendergast said:
For someone who lives in the Hong Kong which is about as capitalist as it is possible to get, you do hold some extraordinary class warrior views at times. Can you really see the Libs Dems, who are tree huggers to a man/woman, allowing this to go through?
Click to expand...

What is their record so far?
 
how boring are the british politics boards, do they even exist.
Or do you guy's just like conversing with people who have straight white teeth?
 
There was a documentary on Pot last night, there was a female British PHD and sure enough crocked grey teeth. EWWW!!!

Send the blookes some orthodontist quickly.
 
tom prendergast said:
Well considering that you are a fairly right wing character, I find it odd that you are using a blog in the Guardian, a left wing paper, to substantiate the claim.
Click to expand...

Why? All I did was use google to find a link. That's odd? WTF are you getting at? Seriously? I'd like to understand what you're trying to say.

I find it odd that it's not a huge story. It's such a contradiction of what I would expect.

The final stages of the takeover by the corporate global regime are going down without a whimper from the brainwashed warmers. The energy barons will control the resources and the scientiic dictatorship will control with an iron fist that has a green thumb

161jq15.png
 
tinfoil said:
Why? All I did was use google to find a link. That's odd? WTF are you getting at? Seriously? I'd like to understand what you're trying to say.

I find it odd that it's not a huge story. It's such a contradiction of what I would expect.

The final stages of the takeover by the corporate global regime are going down without a whimper from the brainwashed warmers. The energy barons will control the resources and the scientiic dictatorship will control with an iron fist that has a green thumb

161jq15.png
Click to expand...

It is not a huge story because it is mostly bullshit. Anyway when did you become a treehugger?
 
Last edited:
tom prendergast said:
It is not a huge story because it is mostly bullshit. Anyway when did you become a treehugger?
Click to expand...

Are you missing the point? Global warming is fear mongering tool. That's all it is. It's being used to set up a scientific dictatorship. I've provided the evidence in this thread. How does that make me a tree hugger?

Spoiler alert:
I'm a wood floor contractor-- My livelyhood depends on trees being cut down.
 
tinfoil said:
Are you missing the point? Global warming is fear mongering tool. That's all it is. It's being used to set up a scientific dictatorship. I've provided the evidence in this thread. How does that make me a tree hugger?

Spoiler alert:
I'm a wood floor contractor-- My livelyhood depends on trees being cut down.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference between grown for purpose sustainable forests and the ancient oaks of old England. To allow forests such as Dean and the New Forest etc., to be placed in the hands of big business to be plundered for profit, is the legal destruction of part of our ancient culture. However, as Tom says, a lot of this is bull shit and I would imagine that the forces of good sense are, even now, ranged against the destroyers.
By the way, you are probably aware that forests don't necessarily consist of great tracts of impenetrable trees.
Oh, and another pointlet. The Guardian, which I remember as the Manchester Guardian and the Graundian and the Grauniad is not left wing. It is a liberal daily and was built upon the liberalism of Lloyd George and even GBs greatest liberal (some would say) John Stuart Mill. (NOT liberal as the americans have redefined the word)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top