Cult Of Climastrology Says We Need To Get Rid Of The Military And Capitalism

See, without the military there would be no war, and without war there would be no ‘climate change’. Because there was never war prior to the invention of the fossil fueled engine. And, of course, they had to drag Bat Soup Virus into this

‘No Warming, No War’: Report Details How US Militarism and Climate Crisis Are Deeply Interwoven

A new report examining the federal budget illuminates the deep connections between the climate emergency and the U.S. military, arguing that the shift to a green economy requires a just transition away from both fossil fuels and endless war.

The report, entitled No Warming, No War: How Militarism Fuels the Climate Crisis—and Vice Versa (pdf), says that the ongoing coronavirus pandemic “has utterly changed life as we know it” and warns against working toward a return to an old normal which was “defined by unfettered capitalism that thrives on the devastation of our planet, the devaluation of human life, and the use of military force to perpetuate both.”

“On a local and global scale, humanity and community have been co-opted by profit and violence. This ‘normal’ has now brought us to the brink of an existential crisis as climate change continues nearly unabated,” co-authors Lorah Steichen and Lindsay Koshgarian write in the foreword. “In the face of both COVID-19 and the climate crisis, we urgently need to shift from a culture of war to a culture of care.”

Tell you what: you get every single nation to give up its military at the same time, and I’ll Believe. But, yeah, those super non-capitalist nations of the USSR, China, Cambodia, Nazi Germany, they were super peaceful, right? Mao, Stalin (and the others), Hitler, the Khmer Rouge, they were really nice, right?

The report was published Wednesday, the 50th annual Earth Day, by the National Priorities Project (NPP) at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). A 2014 Nobel Peace Prize nominee, NPP tracks military spending and promotes a federal budget “that represents Americans’ priorities, including funding for people’s issues such as inequality, unemployment, education, health, and the need to build a green economy.”

It’s all just Progressive (nice Fascism) gobbledygook, like we keep seeing, using ‘climate change’ as a basis to scare people into giving up their money and freedom, and for government to simply take Power.

As NPP’s experts explain, the massive U.S. military—with its over two million members and an annual budget exceeding $700 billion—is “among the biggest polluters” on the planet, producing about 59 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year, more than countries such as Sweden, Denmark, and Portugal, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.

Leftists have long had a hard-on to get rid of, or at least totally defang, the U.S. military, which has safeguarded world freedom since WWI, while typically ignoring militaries like Russia’s, China’s, Iran’s, and so forth, as well as the violence from the Islamist groups. The whining continues for a while, even delving into the Border Patrol using drones, until we get to

“To achieve climate justice, we must transform the extractive economy we have now that is harming people and ecosystems,” the report says. “Resisting militarization is core to building an economy that works for people and the planet. As such, we must pursue solutions to the climate crisis that challenge the violent and oppressive systems that have fueled war and warming for generations.”

They never quite want to say what will truly be the replacement for capitalism, or how it will work. Which is the norm.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

9 Responses to “Cult Of Climastrology Says We Need To Get Rid Of The Military And Capitalism”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Cult Of Climastrology Says We Need To Get Rid Of The Military And Capitalism
    By William Teach April 24, 2020 – 7:13 am

    Actually in the article: ““defined by unfettered capitalism that thrives on the devastation of our planet, the devaluation of human life, and the use of military force to perpetuate both.”

  2. KlemDadidlehopper says:

    GEE sounds like CHINA’s wet dream huh?

    No more capitalism to compete with the PEOPLES HEROIC ARMY of China that welds people in their homes and lets them starve to death. Or puts a million MUSLIMS in concentration camps for REEDUCATION.

    Speaking of China. An insideous threat to the world in every way imaginable. THE CCP, NOT THE CHINESE PEOPLE…There is a difference RACE BAITERS.

    Some interesting News:

    UK reconsidering their ties with CHINA and now balking at letting Huawei build its 5g.

    France investigating China.

    Over a dozen countries seriously in need of PPE to fight the virus have had to send all of it back to China because it is defective.

    MORE GREAT NEWS: TIP OF THE ICEBERG FOLKS.

    Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, who is the chair of Harvard’s Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department, is accused of lying about working with several Chinese organizations, where he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese entities.

    According to court documents, Lieber’s research group at Harvard had received over $15 million in funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense, which requires disclosing foreign financial conflicts of interests.

    The complaint alleges that Lieber had lied about his affiliation with the Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) in China and a contract he had with a Chinese talent recruitment plan to attract high-level scientists to the country.

    He was being paid $50,000 per month by the Chinese university and given $1.5 million to establish a nanoscience research lab at WUT, the complaint said.

    One of the two escaped back to China the second was arrested with over 50 vials of unknown biological samples.

  3. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    Tell you what: you get every single nation to give up its military at the same time, and I’ll Believe.

    If every nation gives up its military, then the first guy who puts together a private army, or the first nation that chooses to rebuild its military, becomes a power.

    Leftists have long had a hard-on to get rid of, or at least totally defang, the U.S. military, which has safeguarded world freedom since WWI, while typically ignoring militaries like Russia’s, China’s, Iran’s, and so forth, as well as the violence from the Islamist groups.

    The purportedly multicultural left are actually very egocentric: they simply cannot understand that other people, in other cultures, have different mindsets, different values, and different ways of thinking than liberal Westerners. They demonstrate this with things like supporting the Arabs against Israel, not realizing that the Arabs quite happily make second-class citizens of women and imprison and even execute homosexuals. To them, if the Islamists are violent, why it’s because of white Western oppression, and they’ll be all sweetness and light once the wicked West is overthrown.

    But, most of all, they do not understand the urge to power. Ambitious men seek power, power to rule, power to dominate, from small-scale things like gangs in the cities to dictatorships over nations. They come up with fancy terms like “toxic masculinity,” because the left are so heavily composed by feminist women and emasculated, frequently homosexual men males. (Of course, those feminist women marry those weaker men males, but wind up screwing around with real men on the side.)

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      The estimable Mr. Dana writes that nations need to spend trillions on defense because males with power display non-existent “toxic masculinity” and want to take stuff from other nations. Is that it?

      Anyway, the article Teach used as his bete noir didn’t use the dichotomous, all-or-none language Teach claims. A reduction in military spending is not defanging or eliminating the defense.

      Much like Mr. Kye sees Caucasians as superior, the estimable Mr. Dana tries to make the case that males are superior to females, and that hetero males are superior to gay males.

      • Kye says:

        You keep saying that I see Caucasians as superior. To whom and how? You need to be specific as I do believe Caucasians are superior but not to everyone in everything. Show me where I’m wrong. Similarly, you make the case that Dana thinks the same about men over women and queers. In what areas? Or do you think Caucasians and all males are inferior to all races and sexes in all things? Because that’s the way you are framing us or should I say that’s the corner you’re trying to paint us into.

        BTW, you’re a Caucasian and I don’t think you’re superior in any way to anyone so I assume that proves you are wrong. In my life I have never met a negroid, Asian, Mongoloid or woman I believe to be inferior to you. All those I’ve known are your superior in every way by light years. So you see, I do not believe ALL Caucasians are superior therefore your theory is busted.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2bbf57dd4b48cb60daa2c4e4c544a8559661d745acad3d3097b1523635126c51.jpg?w=600&h

        Trump 2020 Cause if they’re dumb enough to take throw away ideas literally they have no business in power.

      • Dana says:

        Mr Dowd wrote:

        Much like Mr. Kye sees Caucasians as superior, the estimable Mr. Dana tries to make the case that males are superior to females, and that hetero males are superior to gay males.

        IT ought to be obvious: males and females are different, in ways that make a difference. Males are, on the whole, bigger, faster and stronger than females, and when it comes to the mechanisms of power, those things matter. Females might be just as intelligent as males, but there’s no apparent power advantage in a tie. Females live longer than males, but that advantage does not lead to a power advantage, because power is accumulated at younger ages.

        There is no human society of which we are aware in which males did not have a power advantage over females, and even today, in a culture in which physical strength is no longer necessary to obtain power, many women are complaining that they are still undervalued and not being accorded everything they believe they are due.

        As for me holding that heterosexual males are superior to homosexual ones, that is absolutely true: that is exactly what I believe. All else being equal, homosexual males have surrendered their reproductive ability, which by itself makes them inferior; they have ended their individual lines. And if sexual orientation is in any way genetically determined, they have also surrendered a next homosexual generation, depending solely on heterosexuals to produce more homosexuals.

        Of course, not all else is equal. Males have been the power group, the rulers of human society far as long as we know about, yet among thousands upon thousands of generations, we know of no one who came to power as an open homosexual. There are a few purported to have been homosexual leaders, like Richard CÅ“ur de Lion and Alexander the Great, but whether they were homosexual or otherwise, they achieved their positions because they inherited them. Where is the homosexual leader who emerged from obscurity and achieved greatness without having hidden his sexual orientation from everyone?

  4. John says:

    Heartland contractor Naomi Seibt has marched in Germany with the neo Nazi white nationalist movement and has often made anti Semitic remarks about their false “victimization”
    Teach does that mean that al who belong to the Cult of Climate Change Deniers hate Jews ?
    Of course American Jews are one of the most liberal blocks in the Democratic Party and vote 80% Dem, but you don’t really HATE them, do you ?
    In NYC Covid-19 daily deaths are more tHan from all other causes.
    In fact they are now more than all other causes combined

  5. Dana says:

    John wrote:

    Of course American Jews are one of the most liberal blocks in the Democratic Party and vote 80% Dem, but you don’t really HATE them, do you ?

    I doubt that American Jews are one of the most liberal blocs in the Democratic Party, but it is certainly true that they are the Democrats second most loyal voting demographic.

    Other than the way they vote, at least this American conservative very much appreciates American Jews, because they are the epitome of what we say the American dream should be. They teach their children to work hard in school, to get the best grades, and to earn the best collegiate admissions. Then they are taught to work hard in college, to earn the best positions in the professional world once they are graduated. American Jews are notoriously loyal to their community and families. If every demographic group in the US was like Jews, we would have very few problems.

    Alas! American Jews are primarily urban dwellers, and that has put them solidly in the Democratic camp for generations.

  6. Kye says:

    My first wife was Jewish and her father was a big city rich as hell fully Democrat Jew. He owned 7 New car dealerships and two other companies that you have all heard of but I will not name here. He was worth $100 million when $100 million was worth something. Yet the only time he and the family went to shul was if someone close got married, bar mitzvah’d or died. And the only time he held a Seder was for high holy days. I once asked him how he can be a Democrat when they notoriously hate Jews. He said he was raised a Jew and a Democrat because in the city the Dems rule but rarely votes Democrat unless it benefits him. I never questioned him again about politics.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10946 access attempts in the last 7 days.