Marxism and the Global Warming Connection

Marxism: Global Warming and the Redistribution of

Western Wealth to Lesser Developed Nations

Due to the push for globalization, the elitists of this world have ensnared the unsuspecting citizens, the proletariat and bourgeouise, of once-sovereign nations in a tangled web of regulations and treaties. How you ask? They are students of Marx and hold to his ideas on a nation’s superstructure and infrastructure. The materialistic Marx suggested the most important social institution was that of the economy, grouping the remaining institutions of politics, religion, education, and the smallest, and I believe most important, unit of structure, the family into the superstructure where ideas and values are created and reinforced.

Marx’s ideas on the redistribution of wealth are prominent throughout the world today. It can be seen throughout Socialist Europe, one example being the foundation of the European Union. Likewise, here in the states creeping socialism or Fabian socialism, progressing in the early 20th century with the implementation of the graduated income tax, has led us and the world to the doorstep of global corporate fascist-controlled communism. Do not misunderstand me, I believe the less fortunate of our society need assistance, not due to their laziness as is the usual excuse provided from the process of hierarchal diffusion from the elitist-controlled media; but, due to the way the structure of society has been created. It has been developed in such a way as to create a “glass-ceiling” with respect to “class“. And with this glass-ceiling in place the subordinate classes are born into inequalities, just as Marx suggested. However, the justification to take from those within the middle class as is the case with the United States income tax system (35% of income is taxed of those who make $372,951+) is erroneous and purposeful. The fact that the income tax brackets end at $372,951 and anyone (I.e. the upper 1%) who makes more than this $372,951 is still only taxed 35% reinforces my explanation of a “glass-ceiling”, specifically for the middle-class. I would like to note that I was raised in a class far below the “middle” so I would like to think I am examining this specific glass ceiling with an unbiased perspective.

Marx suggested a worker revolution would take place against Capitalism and that from the ashes of capitalism a utopian communism or collectivism would rise. The mode of production and ownership of this production would be wrested from the elite and placed into the hands of the workers. This sounds wonderful to many idealistic and naïve individuals but this idea that the workers will have control over the means of production is fantasy because of the influence the state possesses and the more alarming influence corporations have on the state. I once naively felt that the world could live in harmony within a communist utopia, but the more I have delved into history the more I am certain this “idea” has been concocted and promoted to bring about a totalitarian regime, enslaving the entire world and hurling humanity back into a feudalistic state ruled by an aristocracy whose superiority-complex, driven by “Social Darwinism” and Malthusian ideals justify their elite status as our rulers. Writers such as Aldous Huxley (A Brave New World), H.G. Wells (The Open Conspiracy), and George Orwell (1984 and Animal Farm) have warned of this impending New World Order, but for not. The masses dismiss such talk as conspiracy theory or the ravings of capitalists who fear losing their power and control. However, in all honesty many of these same “capitalists” are promoting this agenda to usher in global communism which will be governed through the United Nations and its subordinate branches. But wouldn’t this affect them as well? Perhaps a quote from a Canadian capitalist by the name of Maurice Strong, who in 1992 was Secretary-General of the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development and more recently, senior advisor to the World Bank and U.N. Secretary-General Koffi Annan illustrates it best, “(I am) a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology.”

By understanding Maurice Strong’s own admission, one can better grasp the complexity of this “conspiracy” and the elitist thinking behind the “man-made” global-warming movement and in retrospect understand that this New World Order would not be a utopian collectivism; rather a totalitarian control mechanism. In December 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark, President Barack Obama and other leaders including leaders from lesser-developed nations will sign a treaty to combat greenhouse gas emissions, in particular CO2. With his signature, President Obama will, in effect, place United States sovereignty into the hands of an unaccountable, unelected arm of the United Nations. According to former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Lord Christopher Monckton, in a speech at the Minnesota Free Market Institute Conference October 16th 2009:

…weeks away, a treaty will be signed… Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it. I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement. How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once…

Lord Monckton mentions “coyly” or reparations are to be provided to lesser developed countries for excessive CO2 emissions by Western countries. The premise for this Marxist idea of redistribution of wealth is that the lesser developed nations should not be penalized for CO2 emissions they have not produced over the decades in contrast to Western industrialized nations such as England, Germany, United States, and France who have. The latent function of such a proposition would be a world where states’ standards of living would be equal to one another thus allowing the governing body (U.N.) easier control over the world population.

How does standard of living have anything to do with Co2 regulations you ask? Many studies have been performed that show a direct correlation with energy consumption and standard of living. The more energy consumed the higher the standard of living in that country. With the signing of such a treaty as is proposed in December of 2009 the standard of living, we as Americans and Westerners in general, are accustomed to will deteriorate rapidly and with it the America we have grown to love. Still not convinced? I will end with another quote from Mr. Strong, “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrial civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Advertisements

~ by jrparrott on March 31, 2010.

One Response to “Marxism and the Global Warming Connection”

  1. This is a fine analysis, wide and deep. A pleasure to read a good mind at work!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: