Australia to UN: no more “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”


What the UN does best…

What the UN does best…

Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. Environmental propaganda being used to implement another ideology is as old as the hills. So it’s about time the UN’s “climate aid” was called out for what it was. And no more syphoning of Aussie taxpayer dollars to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the UN:

FEDERAL cabinet has ruled that Australia will not sign up to any new contributions, taxes or charges at this week’s global summit on climate change, in a significant toughening of its stance as it plans to move within days to repeal the carbon tax.

Cabinet ministers have decided to reject any measures of “socialism masquerading as environmentalism” after meeting last week to consider a submission on the position the government would take to the Warsaw conference.

A further document was produced after the meeting that outlines the government’s position.

The Australian has seen part of the document and it declares that, while Australia will remain “a good international citizen” and remains “committed to achieving the 5 per cent reduction” by 2020 of the 2000 levels of emissions, it will not sign up to any new agreement that involves spending money or levying taxes.

This rules out Australia playing any role in a wealth transfer from rich countries to developing nations to pay them to decrease their carbon emissions.

The decision hardens the nation’s approach to the UN’s negotiations amid a renewed push from less-developed countries this week for $100 billion a year in finance to deal with climate change.

Cabinet decided that Australia would consider joining a new scheme after 2015, but only if all the major global economies did likewise.

Senior ministers believe there is absolutely no chance of that happening.

The Abbott government has explicitly decided that it will not agree to any payments or accept any liabilities as part of any carbon agreement.

The government’s document also says that Australia “will not support any measures which are socialism masquerading as environmentalism”. (source)

Tell it like it is.

Environmentalists regarded as ‘borderline communists’


Watermelons

Watermelons

And the Pope is Catholic. Now tell us something we didn’t know.

It’s unfortunately true that most environmentalists hail from the Left of the political spectrum – that’s simply a fact. Why else are climate protests peppered with banners from the Socialist Workers’ Party and other extreme left organisations, that the Greens are a party of the left and there is a publication entitled Green Left Weekly?

Environmentalism and socialism go together like… windmills and solar panels.

It is a widely held belief, based on plenty of supporting evidence, that environmentalists are using a green agenda as a Trojan Horse to achieve the political goals of more regulation, higher taxes, wealth distribution and global government.

As News.com.au reports:

MANY climate sceptics do not trust environmentalists because they consider them “borderline communists” who want to curtail people’s freedom, a leading US social scientist says.

Speaking on Wednesday night, the University of Michigan’s Andy Hoffman said US global warming sceptics had “a serious distrust of the political ideology behind its proponents”.

“The fear is that environmentalists are left-leaning, they are socialist, borderline communists, and they are using the government to try to control your freedom,” Prof Hoffman said in the Sydney Ideas lecture at the University of Sydney.

“The expression for environmentalists is watermelons, they’re green on the outside, but they’re red on the inside. That really represents their feeling.”

Mr Hoffman said a scientific consensus that humans contribute to climate change had failed to lead to action on the issue because it was really a “debate over values”.

He said despite compelling science, just 40 per cent of Australians believed humans contributed to a hotter planet.

Who can disagree so far? But then it goes downhill, with Hoffman then claiming that it is because of the sceptics “values” that they are sceptical:

“It’s not about CO2, it’s not about climate models, it’s about values, it’s about world views,” the business and environment academic said.

“It’s because deeply held beliefs that they hold dear are under threat.”

Climate change was such a “thorny issue” because it represented “an existential challenge to our world views”, he said.

In that context, he said giving climate deniers [red card for that – Ed] more scientific evidence was like “finding yourself talking to a wall, they’re not going to hear it”.

Professor Hoffman said a “social consensus” to fight climate change needed to be built, similar to that created in the past to combat smoking and slavery.

Hoffman has flipped the argument 180 degrees. Sceptics doubt the pronouncements of environmentalists and climate change activists because of their political leanings AND because they fudge data, massage results, “offer up scary scenarios” as Stephen Schneider once said, delete emails (ClimateGate) and avoid FOI requests.

If the science were genuinely impartial and beyond reproach, then “sceptics” wouldn’t need to search for ulterior motives to explain the environmentalists’ desire to railroad through their agenda.

As it is, however, they are their own worst enemy.

“One of the most important first steps in engaging the debate is not to blame or mock or ridicule,” he said.

You could start by acknowledging the true reasons for climate scepticism.

Carbon tax is wealth redistribution


Obama in drag

So everyone suffers because of the carbon tax, and the poorest in society are then “compensated” by tax cuts:

LOW income earners will be the biggest winners [“biggest winners”? What is this, a TV game show? – Ed] from a Gillard government compensation scheme to offset cost of living pressures from a tax on big carbon polluters.

Generous tax breaks may be offered to low-income families and pensioners while middle-class income earners would also be compensated to soften the blow of rising household bills and living costs associated with the proposed carbon tax. [So they admit that prices of everything will go up, now? – Ed]

Labor is considering a range of options to ease the pain but is understood to be in favour of slashing tax rates, a measure encouraged by the government’s chief climate change adviser Ross Garnaut.

Professor Garnaut has urged sweeping compensation tax cuts for about half of Australia’s working population to keep household costs down and floated the idea of a one-off cut to the petrol excise to keep bowser prices manageable.

The government rebates could net low income earners about $1500 a year extra in tax breaks, with welfare increases also a likely option [must entrench that culture of dependence on the state – Ed] News Ltd reports today. The report says Prime Minister Julia Gillard is considering raising the tax free threshold to deliver a financial break to a larger number of Australians who will be hit by escalating cost of living pressures under a carbon tax. (source)

Everyone with half a brain (which obviously excludes Gillard and the Labor government) knows that the carbon tax won’t make the slightest bit of difference to “pollution” or the climate. People won’t use less energy or eat less food, they’ll just pay more for it. So it’s nothing more than a socialist experiment in spreading the wealth around, as someone famous once said…

%d bloggers like this: