"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus

Thursday, March 31, 2011

EU Takes Another Step Towards Totalitarianism

As U.K. Telegraph reports, "cars will be banned from London and all other cities across Europe under a draconian EU master plan to cut CO2 emissions by 60 per cent over the next 40 years".

Once public right (at least in the cities) to move around independently is taken away, then it becomes easier than herding a flock of sheep to manipulate the masses. 

Why do you think the left here has long been pushing for hair-brained ideas like rapid rail, etc. despite geographic and cultural reasons that render them worthless?  The answer is the same whether you are talking about transportation, single-payer healthcare, energy usage, or a myriad of other areas: CONTROL OVER POPULATION.

That is Totalitarianism 101 for those not familiar with Lenin.

8 comments:

Zack said...

You are a coward! You are clearly being challenged, yet instead, you're going to choose to ignore us (I'm not surprised, considering your opinions are consistently ignorant).

Zack said...

#defendyouropinions

William said...

Factose=Win?

The Patriot said...

I ignore trolls with party issued talking points. My opinions on this blog are well supported by the facts as links in my articles would show to anyone who is not an intellectual midget.

factoseintolerant said...

I checked your "facts" from your own links, and they showed you were wrong. Your lack of acknowledgment of your own mistakes is what pushed my partner to escalate. Had you immediately responded with a reply similar to this: "O..M..F..G.., I'm sorry I made an error in my analysis of the information. I will change the post to reflect the facts." You don't even need to change your opinion on the subject, just support your argument with actual evidence. And then perhaps start debating the subject with me, since I would have no problem having a civil debate on the issue.

The Patriot said...

factoseintolerant:

please state your objections to my short piece. I will have a longer article coming that will be hopefully more to your satisfaction. This was mainly an opinion piece based on historic evidence.

As for this one, I am a 30 year student of the collectivist mind. I have many progressive friends as well. I think I can safely say that I know how the mindset works.

Ever since collectivist policy failures starting with the collapse of the Soviet empire, continuing with free market success stories in China and the U.S. of 1980s and 1990s, and culminating with the failure of european welfare states (PIIGS) as well as our pending financial collapse due to 53 trillion in unfunded obligations due to three progressive ideals - namely social security, medicare, and medicaid, the former Fabian socialists who pass themselves as progressives have been in search of a new strategy.

The new strategy that late 1970s gave birth to with likes of James Lovelock was environmentalism (which later evolved in to today's green movement). The original movement was soon hijacked by likes of Dave Foreman and, later, Maurice Strong. Hope you are up on your environmentalists otherwise doing research on these fellows will keep you quite busy!

Here is the idea:
Use the green agenda as a tool to effectuate social change. Google Van Jones speeches and watch them. Ask yourself why so many in the green movement are avowed Marxists like Van Jones.

There’s no greater social power than the power to ration – an insidious form of leverage over the public. And, other than rationing food (and healthcare), there is no greater instrument of social control than rationing energy, the enabler of just about everything one does and uses in an advanced society like ours.

Control means power. As to how green initiatives would gradually transform to dependence on central government: the idea is impoverishing of people through policies that would render energy prohibitively expensive to use. With accompanying wealth destruction, human nature would take care of the rest – trading more and more of their liberties for more security in a vicious cycle until any semblance of free markets would eventually disappear.

Look at the U.K. Prime example of the end result of such policies. I lived there 2 years. Poverty (compared to the U.S.) is stunning. Gas is near $10 per gallon. The government is now discussing energy rationing. Society is in disarray. If you like what you see there, you can defend the green movement all you like.
Don't take my words, watch likes of Van Jones and Maurice Strong. Then, we can discuss this further.

factoseintolerant.com said...

I posted a reply about this that was longer, but it has not shown up. So until I find the energy to write more this will have to suffice. My only problem with you report is that it was not an opinion piece backed up by "historical evidence." The evidence you used was a worldwide statistic and you passed it off as in the United States. I only ask you either change your number from 73 to 35, or else remove United States. In the second option you will undoubtedly have you change your statistic of deaths caused bny nuclear from 0 to a much higher number (ranging from 4,000-985,000 depending on estimates of just Chernobyl).

The Patriot said...

Agreed with the correction and I will make it.

You claim my opinions were not backed up by facts on Chernobyl deaths? And say: "change your statistic of deaths caused bny nuclear from 0 to a much higher number (ranging from 4,000-985,000 depending on estimates of just Chernobyl)"

Here is the 20 year U.N. WHO study conclusions (the only one of its kind) :
"A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, an international team of more than 100 scientists has concluded."
Also the study concludes that the current count is less than 50 directly attributable deaths. Findings are an interesting read.

Link:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/index.html