The Sky is Falling productions, in association with Executive Producer C. N. Little, presents:
“The Bolsheviks formed the “government”, but the Environmensheviks are with us still!”
Directed by Al Gore
Based on a story by Karl Marx
Screenplay by the Third Reich Co-operative
Special Thanks to PETA and the Earth Liberation Front
Environmentalist political philosophy explained at the von Mises Institute.
The Rhetoric of the Environmental Movement
…When one refers to “the right to a smoke-free environment,” as numerous spokesmen of the anti-smoking campaign often do, surely it makes sense to ask “of just whose environment are we speaking?” While I might indeed have such a right to demand of others that they not smoke on my property, have I the same right when it comes to the property of others? But even put in such bald form, the majority of environmentalists would argue that, in most cases, I would indeed have such a right. Such rights obtain, they argue (and in this they are by no means alone), because most private property is not, in reality, private at all, since members of the public (either all members of the public, as is the case with, say, a department store, or certain specific members of the public, as is the case with a business office) are invited onto the property. By virtue of this fact, nominal private property is transmuted into commonly owned property, the disposal of which can justifiably be determined by political means. Indeed, most environmentalists have extended this notion of public ownership to the whole of the natural world. They write of the “common heritage of all humanity” and of “sharing the world’s resources equitably.” It is as if each of us, when born, inherits our pro rata share of all the wealth of the world, the land and the oceans of the earth, and all that is on, above, or below it, without regard to the prevailing ownership of these resources. It is apparent that the term “right,” as here used, designates something quite different from what is signified in the expressions “right to life,” or “right to one’s liberty.” A “right” to a portion of the world’s resources clearly obligates the civil authorities (and the population at large, who ultimately must fund the operations of the civil authorities) to certain positive acts. This is particularly true in this instance since one’s “right” is, on examination, not an individual right at all, but rather a “collective” right (if such a perverse notion makes any sense at all) that, by its very nature, can be exercised only by some authority ostensibly representative of the collective.
…Among the charges leveled against modern society, of which primitive societies alone are guiltless, is the institution of private ownership of property. Capitalist institutions particularly contribute to the despoliation of nature and its fragile resources. Doubtless it is for this reason that environmentalism quickly became popular among so many Marxists, who eagerly embraced the ecological movement’s glorification of a fictitious primitive communalism. Research undertaken by these eco-socialists has discovered, for example, that before Western colonization, “third world” populations stood in ecological balance with their environment, where “harmony with nature was a feature of their lifestyles” and that “poverty” as it is known today was almost unknown in pre-colonial Africa.
Yes, this is how Al Gore thinks. Remember that internal combustion engines are evil.
And, as to Rachel Carson, Professor Hamowy is very kind in not pointing out an obvious connection: There are 10’s of millions of malaria deaths on Carson’s head for the banning of DDT. She’s right up there with Hitler and Stalin and Mao – and from the same motivations.
There’s much more and it is worth reading it all.