Socialism and Environmentalism: A History

[Geaux4it]

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

You like drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air. Doing that is what you consider "taking one for the team". Right?

I'm sorry. Your arguments ring hollow when you compare what the world must endure years to come, yet you have no concern about the damage the Obama regime is casting on generations to come

-Geaux

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. "In its modern beginnings, socialism was optimistic and well intentioned...

A half-century before Karl Marx published the Communist Manifesto, there was Gracchus Babeuf’s Plebeian Manifesto, which was later renamed the Manifesto of the Equals. Babeuf’s early (1796) work has been described as socialist, anarchist, and communist, and has had an enormous impact.


He wrote: “No more individual property in land: the land belongs to no one. We demand, we want, the common enjoyment of the fruits of the land: the fruits belong to all.


For Babeur, socialism would distribute prosperity across the entire population, as it would “[have] us eat four good meals a day, [dress} us most elegantly, and also [provide] those of us who are fathers of families with charming houses worth a thousand louis each.”


Oscar Wilde:
“Under socialism…there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings…Each member of society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society…”


Here, then, are the major themes of socialist theory. It takes very little interpolation to find that opponents profit at the expense of the environment, and conditions of inequality in society."

From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006


First, the guarantees of socialism.....Utopia!
Then, when they are never fulfilled....change the subject: "You're opposed to pollution, aren't you????"

Surprising how many fall for the ploy.

 

[2aguy]

If you pollute the water on your property, and it flows downstream to do harm on someone else's property...

...whose property rights need to be protected by the Government?

Of course...and because we believe in private property...you have a recourse to the courts.....try living in the communist paradises and their environmental policies....

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you pollute the water on your property, and it flows downstream to do harm on someone else's property...

...whose property rights need to be protected by the Government?

Here's a hint...

...the above was not meant as rhetorical question. I'd really like to know the opinion of you people in the thread.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What's wrong with keeping the environment clean?

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

-Geaux

True, but the enviro movement is not only pursuing an agenda of anti-business. It is also pursing a Marxist one world government ruled by a very small elite. Surprisingly many people can't see this.

Yup.

Today I will show that socialism and environmentalism are one and the same.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you pollute the water on your property, and it flows downstream to do harm on someone else's property...

...whose property rights need to be protected by the Government?

Of course...and because we believe in private property...you have a recourse to the courts.....try living in the communist paradises and their environmental policies....

The courts are the Government. The laws that would apply to a court case are the Government.

 

[zeke]

Think this through, Zeke.....do you actually imagine that those opposed to government taking property rights are any more in favor of "drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air" then you are????

I have to figure that IF you expect that industry will self police themselves as to pollution, then you don't mind too much about drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air.

Why would a polluting industry spend money on something that creates no profit, just for you? Why would they do that? Stop polluting just because you believe they will? That's just naive.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's wrong with keeping the environment clean?

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

-Geaux

True, but the enviro movement is not only pursuing an agenda of anti-business. It is also pursing a Marxist one world government ruled by a very small elite. Surprisingly many people can't see this.

Yup.

Today I will show that socialism and environmentalism are one and the same.

Then you'll be making a case FOR socialism, not against it, because environmental protection is a positive, not a negative.

But, by all means, proceed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

You like drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air. Doing that is what you consider "taking one for the team". Right?

Think this through, Zeke.....do you actually imagine that those opposed to government taking property rights are any more in favor of "drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air" then you are????


It is classic misdirection by your manipulators.....by taxation, regulation, convincing folks like you to accept absurd arguments....


Do you own anything?

"You didn't buy that...someone in government bought it for you...."
Would you believe that, too?

Your property rights cannot allow you to pollute other properties or persons.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Think this through, Zeke.....do you actually imagine that those opposed to government taking property rights are any more in favor of "drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air" then you are????

I have to figure that IF you expect that industry will self police themselves as to pollution, then you don't mind too much about drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air.

Why would a polluting industry spend money on something that creates no profit, just for you? Why would they do that? Stop polluting just because you believe they will? That's just naive.

A polluting industry?
Is there any demand for a polluting industry?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

You like drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air. Doing that is what you consider "taking one for the team". Right?

Think this through, Zeke.....do you actually imagine that those opposed to government taking property rights are any more in favor of "drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air" then you are????


It is classic misdirection by your manipulators.....by taxation, regulation, convincing folks like you to accept absurd arguments....


Do you own anything?

"You didn't buy that...someone in government bought it for you...."
Would you believe that, too?

Your property rights cannot allow you to pollute other properties or persons.

Yeah, man. We need pre-emptive regulations in place to punish people before they may actually violate someone else rights. That way we can be sure it never happens.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The above two posts are examples of individuals who fit the description of useful idiots...perfectly. Make that the two above the one above....

This above is the useful tool talking to himself in the mirror.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

You like drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air. Doing that is what you consider "taking one for the team". Right?

I'm sorry. Your arguments ring hollow when you compare what the world must endure years to come, yet you have no concern about the damage the Obama regime is casting on generations to come

-Geaux

You mean the damage BHO is cleaning up from the Bush disasters.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course there is a TASB. Note the demand on the board for your mouth farts. Truly, your stupidity is legend.

To the point, coal production causes pollution.

We the People through our legislatures have the right to force the industry to higher standards of production to limit pollution.

 

[Discombobulated]

1. For ever action, an equal and opposite reaction.

That's not only true in physics, but its expression can be found in political philosophies, as well.

When the industrial revolution burst upon the scene, and, as it had just begun to raise standards of living, it also produced chaos, filth, danger and a degree of misery in local environs. In fact, so much dirt and detritus that there were folks who imagined a calmer, more pastoral existence...a certain communal harmony.




2. There was a widespread desire for a socialist utopia, where "can't we all just get along" was the motto and the aim: a childish notion in which every person want the same things and is willing to give and take.

It could be framed as "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

And some still believe that to be a possibility....those for whom knowledge and experience never seem to serve as a prism through which to see the world.




3. Taking their cue from Jean Jacques Rousseau, they accepted the idea that primitives lived a much happier life- a simpler one- getting along with each other and kinship with nature, and that modern man has left those behind.
And, again....some simpletons still believe same.

In any case, many elites of the time, such as English poets Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Robert Southey, were in the forefront of the movement, and planned to begin a socialist utopia in America...
" Pantisocracy(... meaning "equal or level government by/for all") was a Utopian scheme devised in 1794 by the poets Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Robert Southey for an egalitarian community. It is a system of government where all rule equally. They originally intended to establish such a community on the banks of the Susquehanna River in the United States,..."
Pantisocracy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

a. Reality reared its ugly head when Coleridge found that Southey had no intention of putting his personal wealth into the communal pot, and that the whole 'community' would only be 5-6 acres.
Kaufman, "No Turning Back," p.46-47




4. Some got a lot further with the dream:

"Robert Marcus Owen(/ˈoʊən/; 14 May 1771 – 17 November 1858) was a Welsh social reformer and one of the founders of utopian socialism and the cooperative movement. In 1824, Owen came to America to invest the bulk of his fortune in an experimental 1,000-member colony on the banks of Indiana's Wabash River, called New Harmony. New Harmony was to be a utopian, or ideal/perfect, society."
Robert Owen - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

a. Owen's view was pretty much the same as Liberalism, communism, and all the rest: Living together with nature, and sharing, would "remove all causes for contest between individuals" and "cleanse human society of evil." "Heavens on Earth : Utopian Communities in America 1680 - 1880," Mark Holloway, p. 80.




b. New Harmony, Indiana began in 1926....and fell apart by 1830.

Another bogus thread with purposely deceptive title.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Of course there is a TASB. Note the demand on the board for your mouth farts. Truly, your stupidity is legend.

To the point, coal production causes pollution.

We the People through our legislatures have the right to force the industry to higher standards of production to limit pollution.

That's not what asked, Dullard. But congrats on the intelligible posting. Well, mostly anyway.

 

[Geaux4it]

Nothing if you support anti-business agendas under the pretense of saving the environment

You like drinking polluted water and breathing polluted air. Doing that is what you consider "taking one for the team". Right?

I'm sorry. Your arguments ring hollow when you compare what the world must endure years to come, yet you have no concern about the damage the Obama regime is casting on generations to come

-Geaux

You mean the damage BHO is cleaning up from the Bush disasters.

Well of course, I fully expect useless excuses from those with no ambition

-Geaux

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. The dream certainly is attractive, though.


Perhaps the best description of those Romantics can be seen in this poem, by William Wordsworth...from 1806:


" The world is too much with us; late and soon,

Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;—

Little we see in Nature that is ours;

We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!

This Sea that bares her bosom to the moon;

The winds that will be howling at all hours,

And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers;

For this, for everything, we are out of tune;

It moves us not. Great God! I’d rather be

A Pagan suckled in a creed outworn;

So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,

Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;

Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;

Or hear old Triton blow his wreathèd horn."


One can feel the attraction of the mythical world he describes.
But it is mythic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Please speak sensibly and clearly.

That was nonsense by you, Geaux4it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. For individuals of this, that of the Romantics and the socialists, '...it takes very little interpolation to find that opponents profit at the expense of the environment, and conditions of inequality in society.'

It became, in the early 20th century, the 'environmental movement.'


a. There was Rousseau's idea that technology and science led to greed and a desire for unnecessary luxury.

b. There was the Romantic's demand that man needed a closer relationship with nature.

c.And there was the utopianist cry for the end of private property.

There is no discernable difference between socialism and environmentalism



All they needed was the proper element of crisis....and that came in the forms of WWI, and the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The former showed the new destructive ability of technology...and the latter shook the faith that capitalism had built up, prosperity for all.


The same fear that causes many to sell their stocks in a correction resulted in the growth of the environmental movement.
And the Socialists cheered!