I think they mean that they need a GND to get fascism, but, you know, projection by the Cult of Climastrology over at Truthout
We Need a Green New Deal to Defeat Fascism and Reverse Inequality
In the debate about what strategy to adopt to combat climate change, the Green New Deal has quickly become the new buzzword on the left. Is it an insufficient social-democratic response to the present crisis, or is it, in fact, the only realistic project we have to save the planet? Robert Pollin, distinguished professor of economics and co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, is a leading proponent of a green future and he shared his vision of the Green New Deal in the interview below, which appeared originally in Swedish in the left paper Flamman.
Jonas Elvander: You are one of the most well-known scientific spokespersons for a so-called “Green New Deal.†Can you explain what that means?
(Pollin spends a lot of time explaining, including the parts where Government is running things, banning things, controlling things)
Your proposal does not only not question growth as such, but it also does not question the capitalist version of growth. Do you therefore think it is fair to characterize the GND as a social-democratic or Keynesian alternative to Marxist or other anti-capitalist climate strategies? Or are these distinctions irrelevant?
I don’t agree with your characterization of my position. As I said above, I certainly do not advocate economic growth for its own sake. Rather, the Green New Deal offers the only approach to climate stabilization that can deliver an expansion of good job opportunities and rising mass living standards. In all the literature on de-growth, I have not seen a single credible presentation as to how you expand job opportunities and raise mass living standards under a de-growth scenario. The Green New Deal is therefore the only viable climate stabilization framework that can also reverse the rise in inequality and defeat both global neoliberalism and ascendant neo-fascism.
Um, OK? That is pretty much it. There are two mentions of fascism: the headline and in that paragraph. That’s it. There’s really no discussion of what he means by reversing it. And, really, it is his buddies in the Cult who are the neo-fascists. Or call them Modern Socialists, who are Progressives, who are what’s called “nice Fascists.” This doesn’t mean they are nice, it means they are doing all this “for your own good.” Funny that they never do this in their own lives, though, eh?
