It’s been pretty clear since the day the Green New Deal was announced that that $93 trillion mess was about a lot more than reducing carbon emissions.
And teen climate alarmist Greta Thunberg said the quiet part out loud, writing that we need to dismantle the “colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression [that] have created and fueled” climate change.
In other words, capitalism.
We’ve heard just about everything when it comes to climate change, but we have to admit The Nation has us utterly puzzled with this tweet, not to mention the article that goes with it:
If we want to keep cities safe in the face of climate change, we need to seriously question the ideal of private homeownership.
https://t.co/aU6VOSSfz8— The Nation (@thenation) December 26, 2019
Of course, the entire piece stems from the California wildfires, which weren’t caused by climate change.
In short, blame “white, middle-class families” and their “expansionist, individualist, and exclusionary patterns of housing” for our current crisis.
But few are discussing one key aspect of California’s crisis: Yes, climate change intensifies the fires — but the ways in which we plan and develop our cities makes them even more destructive.
The growth of urban regions in the second half of the 20th century has been dominated by economic development, aspirations of homeownership, and belief in the importance of private property. Cities and towns have expanded in increasingly disperse fashion, fueled by cheap energy.
Infrastructure has been built, deregulated, and privatized, extending services in more and more tenuous and fragile ways. Our ideas about what success, comfort, home, and family should look like are so ingrained, it’s hard for us to see how they could be reinforcing the very conditions that put us at such grave risk.
To engage with these challenges, we need to do more than upgrade the powerlines or stage a public takeover of the utility companies. We need to rethink the ideologies that govern how we plan and build our homes.
How about upgrading the powerlines first and see how that goes.
Resist the #ClimateCult
— Man of Mesa (@manofmesa) December 26, 2019
— Dan Stringer, Future Oriented Financier (@Danstringer74) December 26, 2019
Who’s this “we?” Good gawd. Communist much?
— Deboosted Deplorable #749230716 🇺🇸 👌 🌊 🌴 (@Shrugging_Atlas) December 26, 2019
Hahahahaha… yeah, people are gonna love that idea. Sure they will. Good luck selling that shit.
— * (@JamesMa18187394) December 26, 2019
Socialism will not stop climate change. Nothing will stop climate change. Climates change, it’s what they do. pic.twitter.com/tqqooSTo1z
— BitOhoney (@OhoneyBit) December 26, 2019
Get in the bin, you socialist thieves.
— The Anti Feminist (@Beth_Alize) December 26, 2019
Communist garbage. This is America.
— Connor (@ConnorC75487027) December 26, 2019
Amazing how every problem “created by Climate Change” has a solution based on full communism. Its almost like you are using an “emergency scenario” to seize power and spread your communist agenda. Also funny how California is a dumpster fire and the rest of us have to pay for it
— Millennial Investor (@Millennial23) December 26, 2019
Slowly the mask is lowered.
— 💧CocoNutdog 🇦🇺 (@Coconutdog01) December 26, 2019
You Commies suck at hiding your terrible agenda.
— Huy Fong (@Mott5) December 26, 2019
Let’s just put the populace in camps.
— Brad 🎩 Zingas (@brahzinga) December 26, 2019
Lol, I can find better ideas written on the local gas station’s bathroom stall. The left has the absolute worst ideas.
Seriously, go back and brush up on the history of socialism, because y’all are embarrassing yourselves.
— Uranium Covfefe (@zoochum) December 26, 2019
I think we need to do more to protect cities from ghosts, goblins, and witches. They’re more real that anthropomorphic climate change ©.
— GeorgiaBoy325 ⭐⭐⭐ (@Boy325Georgia) December 26, 2019
“Liberal run states are Flammable. Everything liberals touch they destroy.”
I think this 👆 is a more fitting headline
— BP (@BP43210) December 26, 2019
So explain All Gore’s home….
— Freethinker (@FreethinkerInCA) December 26, 2019
It’s as big as Toledo’s biggest mall. That’s big. #hypocrite.
— ❌ Carol Greenberg (@LadyImpactOhio) December 26, 2019
California proves it’s leaders and politicians are jackasses. Try again @thenation
— James Moody (@jfmoodyIV) December 26, 2019
Clear…the…effing…brush!!
— FlaTrucker (@FlaTruckerFrank) December 26, 2019
Go away
— J.S. (@TheOnlyJasonS) December 26, 2019
GFY!!!!! pic.twitter.com/3LgwT5qbEz
— Truth Seeker (@YelloDeville) December 26, 2019
Read more at Twitchy
Many radical enviromentalists reject the idea of Private Property and want it all under the control of the Government some even beleive that the Earth Owns Us not the other way around their into this Gaia nonsense spread by crack-pots like James Lovelock
Put us in pens, dehumanize us, make George Orwell’s Animal Farm real. That’s what the commies did to East Germans.
They lobotomized the gumption from them. If everything comes from the government…. EVERYTHING!…..why try?
Blame the homeowners !?
Why won’t Newsom allow an investigation of the
MATCHERS ?
What’s their nationality, ethnicity, religion, etc.
AND
Why does anyone think they’re setting fires ?
It was maybe 5 years ago, in north east Los Angeles, that a man struck up a conversation with me. He quickly went into a diatribe about white people shouldn’t be in California. It belongs to Mexico and people of Mexican descent. I immediately disagreed with him and he moved on.
There’s Quebecois who think the same way. They haven’t resorted to torching English – speaking suburbs.
There is a great deal of value of living in a house of comfortable size with a yard. Going outside and encountering a lawn rather than concrete has significant value. Not that one of the things Goh criticized was cheap energy as if that is a problem that needs to be corrected. Owning a home means the owner can make it a real home with modifications that suit the family, and there is value when it is sold or passed on to the kids. We have gone one step further by living a rural area. We are in the middle of a forest and out of sight of all neighbors. If the greens consider individualist homes to be a problem, the alternative is a drastic down grade in the standard of living.
Consider stuffing everyone into small apartments. This could give the liberal elite a lot of opportunity for control without the bother of an uncooperative legislature. Private ownership is evil so the mostly likely owner would be the cities. They could include provisions in their leases for no pets and no guns. Controls for thermostats wouldn’t be in the apartments but at a central control station where they would be set to a politically correct 65 or even 62 degrees. The monthly charge for a space to park a car would be very high reflecting the politically incorrectness of owning a car, especially one powered by fossil fuels. If it got really bad the apartment complex would filter the internet to block politically subversive web sites such as the Climate Change Dispatch. If it got even worse software could monitor email to determine who would be required to go to enlightenment classes on subjects like Climate Change, Gun Control, Homosexuality, Abortion, and Immigration. People commenting on this web site have been talking about the climate change movement being an effort to limit freedom and impose draculan controls. This is how it could be done.
David, I think you may have described China, today. The government commissioned the construction of large blocks of apartment buildings to accommodate the exodus of rural peasants who now work in the new factories along the coast. Are they controlled? Is their access to the Internet restricted?
You bet.
We are so use to the constant garbage coming out of the far left that some times we don’t see a hint of truth. It is not the home owners that are to blame for the impact of fires, but the developers and country can be blamed for some of the problem. There are places that should never be developed due to the elevated fire danger, and yet, developers build there and the county issues building permits. This isn’t just limited to fire danger. There have been homes built on steep slopes consisting of soil that was nothing more than sand. A year of extra heavy rain sent the homes down the slope. The problem is much larger than this. Perhaps the most common problem is areas that don’t have enough water still allow developers to build large tracks of new homes. Developers are subsidized. The housing tracks often require upgrades to existing roads, sewage treatment, and new schools. The developers move on and these costs must be paid for by long time residents. The worst problem is the loss of wild life habitant and farm land. No development is ever stopped for these reasons. Rather than environmentalists wasting their time on the fraud of climate change, these are the problems they should be working on.