Socialism and Environmentalism: A History

[PoliticalChic]

8. In 1935, socialism morphed into environmentalism when millionaire Robert Marshall founded the Wilderness Society. He advocated nationalizing private forest lands so that citizens could escape modern life.
Nationalizing?
And retreating into less advanced times?




a. "As society becomes more and more mechanized, it will be more and more difficult for many people to stand the nervous strain, the high pressure, and the drabness of their lives. To escape these abominations, constantly growing numbers will seek the primitive for the finest features of life."
Robert Marshall,
Wilderness.net - Bob Marshall


b. " Marshall had clearly defined himself as a socialist by 1932–1933. He told a correspondent: "I wish very sincerely that Socialism would be put into effect right away and the profit system eliminated." Bob Marshall wilderness activist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


9. Marshall joined Norman Thomas' Socialist Party, and his fellow Wilderness-founder, Benton MacKaye, joined Eugene Deb's Socialists. Both were activists for social engineering.


So, while many are recruited in environmentalism by hand-wringing over the fate of, say, the Northern cod fish.....they don't realize that they are supporting the end of individual freedom and liberty, by growing government through nationalization.



After all, whether named socialism, or environmentalism....or communism....or, in fact, Liberalism.....they all march down the same path, simply at different speeds.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives have to demonize environmentalism as one of their stock demons, socialism, or Marxism, or communism,

only because they can't make rational arguments against the merits of environmentalism.

 

[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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

Pollution isn't an industry, dopey. That was my point. No one wants it. No one. No demand. As a byproduct, there are industries that pollute. But the way you guys talk this crap like "conservatives want pollution" is just fucking absurd.

 

[Mr Natural]

Looks like cleanliness is not next to Godliness afterall.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

This is environmentalists of todays version of saving the planet

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

Pollution isn't an industry, dopey. That was my point. No one wants it. No one. No demand. As a byproduct, there are industries that pollute. But the way you guys talk this crap like "conservatives want pollution" is just fucking absurd.

Industries will pollute if

1. it isn't illegal

2. it's a net positive to their bottom line, all things considered.

 

[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.

So what's the non-socialist way you keep pollution and environmental destruction in check?

 

[NYcarbineer]

8. In 1935, socialism morphed into environmentalism when millionaire Robert Marshall founded the Wilderness Society. He advocated nationalizing private forest lands so that citizens could escape modern life.
Nationalizing?
And retreating into less advanced times?




a. "As society becomes more and more mechanized, it will be more and more difficult for many people to stand the nervous strain, the high pressure, and the drabness of their lives. To escape these abominations, constantly growing numbers will seek the primitive for the finest features of life."
Robert Marshall,
Wilderness.net - Bob Marshall


b. " Marshall had clearly defined himself as a socialist by 1932–1933. He told a correspondent: "I wish very sincerely that Socialism would be put into effect right away and the profit system eliminated." Bob Marshall wilderness activist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


9. Marshall joined Norman Thomas' Socialist Party, and his fellow Wilderness-founder, Benton MacKaye, joined Eugene Deb's Socialists. Both were activists for social engineering.


So, while many are recruited in environmentalism by hand-wringing over the fate of, say, the Northern cod fish.....they don't realize that they are supporting the end of individual freedom and liberty, by growing government through nationalization.



After all, whether named socialism, or environmentalism....or communism....or, in fact, Liberalism.....they all march down the same path, simply at different speeds.

lol, so what? You are unknowingly touting the merits of what you call socialism. Most Americans love their national parks, their wilderness areas, nature...

...ever hear of the Adirondacks? Just because you'd prefer to see the region paved over and covered with smokestacks doesn't mean that the sane people of NY do.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yet another ignorant, idiotic, and failed premise from the OP.

Necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures concerning environmental protection have nothing whatsoever to do with 'socialism,' the notion is moronic and inane.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives have to demonize environmentalism as one of their stock demons, socialism, or Marxism, or communism,

only because they can't make rational arguments against the merits of environmentalism.

I'll be waiting for your rational arguments for the merits of socialism.


10. Environmentalism combines socialism with a desire to retreat from modernity and amble back to some imagined small-town America.


With that aim in mind, Democrat Senator Gaylord Nelson 'was the founder of Earth Day, which launched a new wave of environmental activism.... He also rejected the suggestion that economic development should take precedence over environmental protection..."
Gaylord Nelson - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Nelson became the counselor for the Wilderness Society, whose founders were both members of Socialist parties.



Lest any who have been hoodwinked into joining the environmental movement doubt that they have actually joined the Socialist Party, let's take a look at the iconic "Earth Day" celebration.


Denis Hayes "left Harvard after being selected by Senator Gaylord Nelson to organize the first Earth Day."

"Denis Hayes(born 1944) is an environmental activist and proponent of solar power. He rose to prominence in 1970 as the coordinator for the first Earth Day. Hayes founded the Earth Day Network and expanded it to more than 180 nations." Denis Hayes - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


And here is Hayes proclaiming the need to abandon progress and technology, and endorsing socialism:

"We demand a lower productivity and a wider distribution."
"Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocalypse,"byRonald Bailey, p. 3.


Socialism and environmentalism.....inseparable.

 

[bripat9643]

What's wrong with keeping the environment clean?

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

-Geaux

Do you deny that pollution and environmental destruction occur?

You pollute the Earth every time you take a crap.

Anyone who implies we can or should reduce our emission to zero is a fool. The goal should be to reduce them to the point of diminishing returns, and we passed that point a long time ago.

 

[PoliticalChic]

11. "With the failure of the great Socialist experiments in Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America, and with other countries privatizing as fast as possible, the word 'socialism' has disappeared, but the rhetoric and world view remain. Most people in the environmental movement still see free-market democracy through the eyes of Rousseau, Thoreau, Marshall, and MacKaye."
Kaufman, "No Turning Back," p.49.



12. The way the communist/socialist environmentalist movement is advancing its goals is by hiding their aims behind the fraudulent claims that modern life is pushing the world to the edge of the precipice.

The buzzword is 'sustainability,' meaning that aspects of modern life will not allow life on this planet to continue.


The word 'sustainability' is packed with an ominous tinge....until one considers what the Marxists of organizations such as the United Nations considers sinister:


a. "“Sustainable” is the catchword for every activist, bureaucrat, NGO…but try to get a definition. For a hint, the following are considered ‘unsustainable’ by the true believers: single family homes; paved roads; ski runs; golf courses; dams; fences; pastures; plowing of lands; sewers; drain systems; pipelines; fertilizer; wall and floor tile. These and many other elements of life today are on the list for eventual elimination.
Nickson, "Eco-Fascists,", p.9.


Ready to give all of those sinister accoutrements up??
They have to be eliminated.....for you to survive.....


Believe that?

 

[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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

Pollution isn't an industry, dopey. That was my point. No one wants it. No one. No demand. As a byproduct, there are industries that pollute. But the way you guys talk this crap like "conservatives want pollution" is just fucking absurd.

Industries will pollute if

1. it isn't illegal

2. it's a net positive to their bottom line, all things considered.

So if we make it illegal, no one will pollute? You should come back to planet earth some time.

Pre-emptive regulations to force businesses to pay money up front for inspections, higher priced production items, etc have been so effective at making sure there is no pollution that we shouldn't be having this conversation right now. Right?

Or would you like to concede that industries DO, in fact, try to mitigate the pollution they make (and those who buy their products who perpetuate it) through technological advancement. Regulations, government oversight and legality do not change any of the pollution outcomes except to make it more difficult for industries to make these technological leaps.

 

[initforme]

This is a bizarre post. The environmentalist movement is small in numbers and has a very minimal effect on industry. I'm not sure what you want PC. No regulations? Can you imagine the conseque3nces of that? Imagine what corporations would do if they could. Americans don't want to live in an environment like China where one needs a mask to walk around outside I don't agree with the environmentalist wackos but we do need to use our resources in a smart manner and by all means water and air must be protected. That is simply pure common sense.

 

[Ame®icano]

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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

Pollution isn't an industry, dopey. That was my point. No one wants it. No one. No demand. As a byproduct, there are industries that pollute. But the way you guys talk this crap like "conservatives want pollution" is just fucking absurd.

You're wasting your time explaining. Liberals don't understand distinction between government and society. If you object to something, or anything that's being done by the government, liberals conclude that you object to that being done at all.

 

[gipper]

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.

So what's the non-socialist way you keep pollution and environmental destruction in check?

Ever heard of clean air act, clean water act, CERCLA, RCRA, etc........? Google them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is a bizarre post. The environmentalist movement is small in numbers and has a very minimal effect on industry. I'm not sure what you want PC. No regulations? Can you imagine the conseque3nces of that? Imagine what corporations would do if they could. Americans don't want to live in an environment like China where one needs a mask to walk around outside I don't agree with the environmentalist wackos but we do need to use our resources in a smart manner and by all means water and air must be protected. That is simply pure common sense.

You're a fool.

1. "Indeed, the benefits could be a godsend for economically ailing upstate New York. Yet Cuomo, favoring his environmentalist pals on the left, refuses to allow fracking here."
Gov. Cuomo bets against fracking New York Post


2. The socialists...er, enviromentalists.....lead the Socialist.....er, Democrat Party by the nose ring.



3. "I'm not sure what you want PC. No regulations?"
Regulations for WHAT???
You baseless fears????
" The Obamaadministration has not been able to link groundwater contamination to fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency has failed to link fracking to groundwater contamination in three separate studies and, earlier this year, the Energy Department also found that fracking is safe when done properly.

“To my knowledge, I still have not seen any evidence of fracking per se contaminating groundwater,” Energy Secretary Ernest Monizsaidin August.

Dozens of state regulators have also found no evidence of groundwater contamination from fracking operations."
Environmentalists call for national ban on fracking The Daily Caller



4. Here is an example of the sort of regulation that would be efficacious:
Computers should come with a lock-out option for people like you that can only be unlocked by getting above 90 on an IQ test

 

[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.

So what's the non-socialist way you keep pollution and environmental destruction in check?

Ever heard of clean air act, clean water act, CERCLA, RCRA, etc........? Google them.

They're exactly the kind of government actions the OP is going mental over.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

Sure there is, if the polluter is producing goods at a competitive price.

Pollution isn't an industry, dopey. That was my point. No one wants it. No one. No demand. As a byproduct, there are industries that pollute. But the way you guys talk this crap like "conservatives want pollution" is just fucking absurd.

Industries will pollute if

1. it isn't illegal

2. it's a net positive to their bottom line, all things considered.

So if we make it illegal, no one will pollute? You should come back to planet earth some time.

Pre-emptive regulations to force businesses to pay money up front for inspections, higher priced production items, etc have been so effective at making sure there is no pollution that we shouldn't be having this conversation right now. Right?

Or would you like to concede that industries DO, in fact, try to mitigate the pollution they make (and those who buy their products who perpetuate it) through technological advancement. Regulations, government oversight and legality do not change any of the pollution outcomes except to make it more difficult for industries to make these technological leaps.

Oh please. The absurd conservative argument that if we just let business alone it would voluntarily keep the environment clean and their products safe.

I say again...please...