Climate Change Dogma About Money

by Lewis Loflin

Follow @Lewis90068157

The Left counted on mass energy shortages, poverty, and hunger to usher in socialism. They now need a better way to sell socialist snake oil. Fear and intimidation are their weapons of choice.

Let us learn from them in their own words.

Bartender and New York Democrat socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says:

"Fighting climate change will be 'the civil rights movement of our generation' It's inevitable that we will create jobs. We can use the transition to 100 percent renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America."

Now "climate change" is a civil rights movement. It never was about polar bears. Racial justice is racialist socialism.

She is now floating a 70% tax "on the rich" to fund her Green New Deal fantasy. No she means me and I only earn about $24,000 a year. Her goal is to eliminate capitalism, excuse me, fossil fuels in 12 years.

The process will push people like myself into destitution. Food and energy prices will explode.

She talks about "technological capacities" without a clue what that even means. Well I do know and Green Energy is a joke. It is wasteful of resources and expensive.

Most of the scheme is about wealth redistribution and forced rationing through taxation. I pay $8 a gallon for gas. The money is transferred to the "poor" in California as subsidies.

Or across the world.

United Nations "climate" non-scientist policy expert Ottmar Edenhofer agrees:

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole..."

So what is the goal of "climate policy"?

"We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."

Then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ottmar Edenhofe are in full agreement.

Ottmar Edenhofe's defenders claim he never said this. His background it turns out is theologian and philosopher. Better than a bartender I guess. He "invited professional philosophers" to contribute to I.P.C.C. climate reports. I went and checked this out and that is exactly what he meant.

Ottmar Edenhofer is an economist with heavy Marxist/socialist leanings. He has no credentials is any form of hard science, engineering, or technology. Nor does Ms. Cortez. Yet he is "one of the world's leading experts on climate change policy." He served as co-chair at the U.N. I.P.C.C Ref. Wikipedia

To quote,

"Edenhofer says that his interest in philosophy and economics was influenced by his readings of the works of Henry George, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and John Dewey."

None of those people have any expertise in hard science. Most are either communists or social philosophers.

Regarding belief in "climate change" dogma he says:

"Denying out and out that climate change is a problem for humanity, as some cynics do, is an unethical, unacceptable position."

Why? Because he says so?

This man claiming knowledge of climate anything is unethical. Too many social and Marxist philosophers end up being "experts" in what should be a scientific discussion.

The reason they avoid proper use of the scientific method is because, as Edenhofer admits, it is not even about science.

"Edenhofer favors cap-and-trade over a direct carbon tax". He seeks to use the climate change issue to foster world socialism. That is true of most U.N. climate "experts".

His statements (from German and I have the original and had the translation checked) says,

"Basically, it is a big mistake to discuss climate policy apart from the big issues of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun (Mexico) at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the biggest business conferences since the Second World War ... But one has to be clear: we are effectively redistributing world wealth through climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy..."

I applaud his honesty. Is climate change happening? Yes, it is a normal part of nature. Is it crisis? The answer is clearly no. Their solutions and goals prove it isn't.

The problem is other, unrelated issues. Their goal is fostering world governance and world socialism.

Edenhofer also makes it clear all economic growth must be curtailed. He advocates massive transfer payments and reparations for 3rd world failure. This money will come from productive nations going to dysfunctional nations such as those in Africa.

"This will change immediately if emission rights are distributed globally ... then Africa is the big winner, and a lot of money goes there...there will also be the question of how these countries can use this much money in a meaningful way."

The scam works like this. "Emissions rights" are given to these dysfunctional nations. These can be purchased by productive nations thus transferring wealth to dysfunctional nations.

None of this addresses their mostly self-inflicted problems.

One bizarre statement he made is "there is always danger that individual rationality leads to collective stupidity. Therefore you can't solve the climate problem alone."

It seems he is suggesting using government force? Perhaps it's a translation problem form German? Looking at Germany today I think not. Socialism always involves force and theft.

Ref. www.nzz.ch Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermogen neu" translates to "Climate Policy Redistributes World Wealth" retrieved 1-4-2019.

Bartender and New York Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says:

"Fighting climate change will be 'the civil rights movement of our generation' It's inevitable that we will create jobs. We can use the transition to 100 percent renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America."

I take them at their word.