Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Engagement | Main | Nursing a hurt - Josh 100 »
Friday
May272011

'Eco-dictatorship'

I leave you on this rather depressing note:

Germany ‘Sliding Head Over Heels Into Eco-Dictatorship

Germany's green government advisors admit frankly that decarbonization can only be achieved by the limitation of democracy - both nationally and internationally.

Read the whole thing.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (70)

Ve haf vays of makink you decarbonize....

So.... It is all about 'world government' after all....

May 27, 2011 at 6:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid

From the linked GWPF article:

"The transformation to a climate friendly economy... is morally as necessary as the abolition of slavery and the outlawing of child labor." The reorganization of the world economy has to happen quickly; nuclear energy and coal have to be given up at the same time and very soon.

So what exactly will power the world? Because renewables are no more capable of doing it than I am of jumping over the moon.

And yes, it does appear to be about world government after all. No tinfoil hat required.

May 27, 2011 at 6:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

I am SOOOOOOO glad I bought Aldi's last portable generator....

May 27, 2011 at 6:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid

The good news is that this has exactly no chance of working. The degree of detachment from geopolitical reality is, frankly, astounding. I know Schellnhuber is Mr Tipping Point, and very much the alarmist's alarmist, but this will not do his general credibility any good at all.

Even a relatively poorly-informed citizen should be capable of working out that, within the terms of his own argument, nuclear is the only possible way to save the planet.

The illogicality of the anti-nuclear/climate concerned stance will swiftly prove lethal to it.

May 27, 2011 at 6:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Sorry, but I just cannot get over this:

nuclear energy and coal have to be given up at the same time and very soon.

Thank God for fairy-dust eh? At least we'll be able to keep the lights on with that.

May 27, 2011 at 6:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

How does one 'slide head over heels'?

May 27, 2011 at 6:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterCharlie

"the limitation of democracy"

And they wonder why we still make jokes about the war...

May 27, 2011 at 7:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

The comparisons here with the Great Leap Forward, and the back to the land revolution of Cambodia under Pol Pot are all too chilling.

May 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger

BBD, "The good news is that this has exactly no chance of working.".

I think you're right, I hope so anyway, and I think they must do in their hearts. The thing that worries me a little is that all this nonsense is such a distraction. It really would be a good idea IMO to be building lots of nuclear, lots of gas, and ramping up the research to find new and viable energy sources, because even if CO2 is not as big a problem as they think it is, it might still become an issue if it is allowed to grow for too long. On second thoughts, it might be easier to understand their position if they were in fact in the employ of 'big oil'.

May 27, 2011 at 7:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhilip

"The world citizenry agree to innovation policy that is tied to the normative postulate of sustainability and in return surrender spontaneous and persistence desires. Guarantor of this virtual agreement is a formative state [...]."

Now we're talking turkey!

May 27, 2011 at 7:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

Note that the author of the article is CEO of a wind farm company and a member of the SDP. Yet he admits that “the global warming trend has come to a halt during the last 12 years and .. we may enter a long-term cooling phase” and says “the price of utopian climate Jacobinism of the WBGU is too high”.
Democratic discussion of the political cost of the global warming fantasy is apparently possible in Germany. This article could never appear in the Guardian or Independent.

May 27, 2011 at 7:49 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

And to think - years ago there were unthinking dinosaurs amongst us who believed that our esteemed EU co-paymasters had some sort of masochistic national character defect which made the idea of democracy a bit difficult for them.

I mentioned it once - but I think I got away with it..........

May 27, 2011 at 7:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterFoxgoose

Can’t see it, German economy is very strong at present the low value of the Euro making their manufactured goods highly competitive, even the Germans will find it difficult to manufacture Das Auto with wind and solar power!

Whatever happens they will ensure that they keep their manufacturing base competitive well into the foreseeable future.

May 27, 2011 at 8:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterGreen Sand

Wasn't there an Austrian who suspended German democracy sometime in the recent past?

May 27, 2011 at 8:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterCinBadTheSailor

Euro-English

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby
English will be the official language of the European Union rather
than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that
English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5
year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will
make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in
favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have
one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the
troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like
fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted
to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are
possible.Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters
which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre
that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and
it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th"
with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be
dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a
reil sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and
evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united
urop vil finali kum tru. Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking
German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.

Anon

May 27, 2011 at 8:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Agree with Green Sand - I can't see the German industrialists let the greens press the self destruct button on their manufacturing economy. Mind you, clueless Cameron and his cronies appear content to let the Chinese have what's left of ours.

May 27, 2011 at 8:46 PM | Unregistered Commenterlapogus

Yes, Your Grace, a very depressing note. And I believe that the eco-fascisti and the Germans between them could just do this.

May 27, 2011 at 9:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterPFM

Herrs Professors-Doctors have just completed a collective orgy of mental masturbation. Not surprisingly, since it is well known that the German academic egos are some of the largest objects to be found in the known universe.

At least they are realistic on some aspects:

The financial challenges of the transformation are significant, but controllable. Globally, the additional investment required for transformation into a low-carbon society, compared with the cost of ‘just carrying on as we are’, probably lies somewhere in the region of at least US$ 200 to up to 1,000 billion per year by 2030, and would significantly exceed this amount between 2030 and 2050.

The whole report is an obscene display of nostalgia for a Grüne Lebensraum, of course limited to a chosen one sixth of the actual population, which in their words is the carrying capacity of the Planet. That reminds me of the historical parallelism described in this book, worth keeping in mind

May 27, 2011 at 9:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterPatagon

Just to repeat: this is a German article written by a German socialist and head of a renewable energy company, writing in a left-of-centre German newspaper about the danger to German democracy of eco-fascism. Democracy and press freedom are alive and well - in Germany. Try imagining this article appearing in Britain.

May 27, 2011 at 9:33 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

Have (3) proverbial German green government advisors crossed the line (parlez vous) again?

May 27, 2011 at 9:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Germany in the last 20 years has gotten rich and fat seling high grade industrial goods made with plenty of CO2, and via bribes ofcourse (MAN, Siemens, etc). Now they want to play puritan.

When they build a pedal powered Porsche I will believe them. Till then they can get knotted, and take their Teutonic theorising with them.

Nik

May 27, 2011 at 9:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterΝικ
May 27, 2011 at 10:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterShub

I say don't discount anything. There has been a strong push for a one world government for a long time. The fact that it is in print so much more from so many sources, and they aren't even hiding there intentions any more should be a big red warning sign for all.

We have many historical accounts of good governments being turned around and going bad. Destroying their own people and trying to take over the world. From the Romans who did a pretty good job, to Genghis Khan, who did a surprisingly good job for the era.
It has always seemed inevitable that the world would be ruled under a single authority. The UN believe it should be them, the Islamics believe they will be the ones to rule. It’s clear that eventually, someone will make a move to do so, and the environment or "climate" seems to have a lot of political motivation at the moment.

It may accelerate, it may die down, it may morph into a new crisis, it may simply be imposed. But I fear a one world government will eventually happen to the hurt of us all.

May 27, 2011 at 10:30 PM | Unregistered CommenterGreg Cavanagh

At least they're not hiding what it's all about anymore.

May 27, 2011 at 10:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterStuck-record

This would make a potentially game changing Sun headline story. Any Sun readers or editors loitering?

May 27, 2011 at 10:51 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

Pharos-- Euro English.................................Brilliant.

It may be that I am easily intimidated but, I find this article to be very very frightening.
I am reminded of a scene from the film "Cabaret" where there is a very powerful song called "tomorrow belongs to Me" at the end of which one of the charactors in the film turned to his friend and said "Do you still think that you can control them"
If you haven't seen this film clip, it is on utube and I recommend it both as a powerful scene and a posible warning to us all.

May 28, 2011 at 12:00 AM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

With all due respect, Your Grace, I find this to be far more than "depressing"; in fact it may well be beyond, well, alarming! From the article [all emphases in quoted paras below are mine -hro]:

All nations would have to relinquish their national interests and find a new form of collective responsibility for the sake of the climate: "The world citizenry agree to innovation policy that is tied to the normative postulate of sustainability and in return surrender spontaneous and persistence desires. Guarantor of this virtual agreement is a formative state [...]."

This strong state provides, therefore, for the "social problematization" of unsustainable lifestyles. It overcomes "stakeholders" and "veto players" who "impede the transition to a sustainable society." In Germany, climate protection should therefore become a fundamental goal of the state for which the legal actions of the legislative, executive and judicial branches will be aligned.

No doubt it is entirely coincidental that the above should be so consistent with Pachauri's "Vision" for AR5 as articulated at the July 2009 "scoping" meeting:

Climate change needs to be assessed in the context of sustainable development, and this consideration should pervade the entire report across the three Working Groups. In past assessments sustainable development and its various linkages with climate change were seen largely as an add-on. Most governments who have commented on this issue have highlighted the need to treat sustainable development as an overarching framework in the context of both adaptation and mitigation.

And as if this were not bad news enough, as Peter Foster observed in yesterday's National Post, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) "whose members and affiliates" represent 80% of the world trade & investment has jumped onto the "sustainable" bandwagon:

Green alarmists such as Al Gore (who, astonishingly, also won the Peace Prize, in his case, in 2007, for stoking climate hysteria) often maintain that what is needed is a new Marshall Plan, only its objectives would be the reverse of those of George Marshall. The OECD seems more than happy to get with the new anti-Marshall program. It has now become a full-blown advocate of “sustainable development,” which is code for an anti-market ideology of less freedom and more bureaucratic control of the industries the Marshall Plan promoted.

Sustainable development was given its imprimatur by the United Nations-based, and socialist-packed, Brundtland Commission, which led to the mammoth 1992 UN environmental and development conference at Rio. Out of Rio emerged, among many other interventionist initiatives, the Kyoto Accord to control climate by restricting industrial output, and thus growth and jobs.

The OECD’s new sustainable orientation is confirmed by a report released this week on “Green Growth” (along with a “Better Life Index,” whose ideological slant was dissected in this space yesterday by William Watson). The report, and adjunct documents, propose ever-expanding bureaucratic co-ordination and monitoring of economic development at every level.[...]

And they would have us believe that CO2 caused GHGs are a danger to the future of mankind and the planet?!

Amazing. Simply amazing.

May 28, 2011 at 12:57 AM | Unregistered Commenterhro001

Schicklgruber reborn

May 28, 2011 at 1:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

It's disappointing to see so many people using the ravings of one nation's ratbag element as an excuse to disparage the entire population of that nation. The egregious Zed has a point that the tone of commentary in this blog is sometimes shameful. When our own separate nations have no Green totalitarian nutcases who daily make comments every bit as outrageous as those by Schellnhuber and his mob, we can afford to be smug. In the meantime, I hope we can avoid the xenophobia so evident in some of today's crop of comments. World War II finished 66 years ago, people.

May 28, 2011 at 2:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterMique

Mique says: "one nation's ratbag element" ?

This is the:
"Scientific Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change (WBGU) is an influential advisory committee for the German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The chairman of the council is Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research."

This is more serious than just a nut case making headlines.

May 28, 2011 at 4:12 AM | Unregistered CommenterGreg Cavanagh

Germany produces some very nice cars, so please do not mock them, at least not too much.
It's just that here in Australia, German cars are a tad more expensive and unreliable than their Japanese equivalents.
And the later 20th century belonged to Japan.
Now the future is in China, India and the other non Japanese nations.

Here in Australia the government has come to the conclusion that it must tax the economy into the dustbin, to avoid being destroyed by a harmless fertilizing gas.

Tea and bikkies anybody?

May 28, 2011 at 4:16 AM | Unregistered CommenterAusieDan

May 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM | Messenger re Pt Pol analogy

The one that came to my mind was Mao's dictum that activity be devoted to steel production. There are also hints in the Potsdam article that non-compliance is not an option.
However, it's not adequate to say that it's dreadful to contemplate a world government. You have to demonstrate that there is a better final solution than a world government. You have to say to all and sundry that it's fine the way it is, or whatever your preference is. Did you ever wonder what came over the ordinary people of Germany when they were told to fight a war and do other depraved acts? They did them because they did not resist. I'm not seeing enough resistance to this Potsdam dictator-in-waiting and to be fair, I'm not spreading enough myself.
It's quite a worrying document because there are already plenty of loonies around wanting to join the top of the pyramid.

May 27, 2011 at 8:42 PM | Pharos - You just got a job with the EU. Skill matters.

May 28, 2011 at 6:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterGeoff Sherrington

I worked for a German company for a few years and had to deal with the head office on a weekly basis, they are very nice people and the beer is excellent (but Belgium beer has the edge) but they are very autocractic, dictates were issued and they found it very strange when questions were asked or alternatives suggested, they quickly made it known it was not accepted practice.

May 28, 2011 at 6:57 AM | Unregistered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

And in the Guardian

Of course we need industrial goods, but to save Earth we must cut consumption We could lead more fulfilling lives by slowing down the rate of technological progress.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/25/save-earth-cut-consumption

Dark ages here we come

May 28, 2011 at 7:51 AM | Unregistered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

Mique states:

'It's disappointing to see so many people using the ravings of one nation's ratbag element as an excuse to disparage the entire population of that nation'

I have carefully read the remarks above, and I cannot see even one that disparages 'the entire population'. I can see a few that are disobliging about some particular individuals or about some strands of German political thought. But of your accusation...not one.

Please substantiate your claim.

May 28, 2011 at 8:00 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Jones's Mum

@Phil Jones's Mum

Please!! You protesteth too much.

See Nik.; see Patagon. Breath of Fresh Air?

And your own "some strands of German political thought". Similar anti-democratic statements have been made in the mainstream media by warmists in Australia, the US, Great Britain and tout le mond. There's nothing particularly German about that sort of political" thought".

May 28, 2011 at 8:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterMique

LaRouche says it's a British plot!

WBGU Master Plan: British Imperial Eco-Fascism on a Global Scale

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/18114

"Prof. Dr. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, who was dubbed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II in Berlin in 2004, is to force German Chancellor Merkel to end the use of nuclear power in Germany on June 17 as a first step to imposing on Germany and then on the world as a whole his British masters' master plan for global genocide. "

May 28, 2011 at 8:34 AM | Unregistered CommenterFrosty

Phil Jones's Mum has asked me to reply on her behalf since she's had to pop out to see Mrs Cripwell at Number 27.

She points out that the author is credited as a member of the SPD, that Germany has a strong green tendency and that the article discusses the position of some advisers to the German government.

It is not unreasonable to describe 'some strands of German political thought' in commentary upon it.

That our good friends the Germans share some aspects of the warmist disease with other countries is a matter of regret, but that is not a reason to ignore it.

Personally I was delighted to see on a visit to Berlin last week that there was much less obvious petty green propaganda on the streets than we see in London. And almost no H&S nannying.

I guess that having endured 60 years of fascism in various forms, the citizens of that city are unprepared to put up with any more - in whatever cause. Long may their freedoms reign!

May 28, 2011 at 8:47 AM | Unregistered CommenterStirling English

http://www.d-artmedien.com/GO.film.engl.htm

Somebody wants to make a film about it.

May 28, 2011 at 8:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger

NO TO GLOBAL 'GLEICHSCHALTUNG'
Make June 17
The Day Of German Resistance

http://schillerinstitute.org/green_fascism/2011/wgbu.html

May 28, 2011 at 8:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterFrosty

Und zo Chermany iss rising to prominence und superiority vunce more. Ze Fourth Reich VILL prevail!! Deutschland, Deutschland über alles...

Green iss der colour!

May 28, 2011 at 9:20 AM | Unregistered CommenterOld Goat

I think you need to keep things in perspective: as Foxgoose and Geoff Chambers have noted above the report is simply a position paper from a left wing greeny organisation, and is by no means official government policy.

Here's a different point of view, which was the main front-page story of today's Süddeutsche Zeitung, a left leaning, green, heavyweight German newspaper.

The headline, which is what caught my eye in the supermarket today (and which caused me to shell out the 2.2 euros to buy the newspaper, despite the complaints from my wife that "that Bishop Bill [sic] just wasn't worth it") says: "Energiewende kostet 40 Milliarden Euro" - which for the Teutonically challenged translates roughly as "Energy switch to cost 40 billion euros".

The newspaper goes on to report on a position paper from the CSU/CDU, the main, right-wing governing party - the CDU being the party led by Angela Merkel, with the CSU being the sister party here in Bavaria in Southern Germany. It claims there's going to be a hole of about 100 billion euros in German finances up to 2015, of which the "energy switch" (away from nuclear to renewables) would be responsible for 40 billion. The government would have no choice but to abandon these measures as although desirable they would simply not be possible to finance.

So, who to believe, and what's going to happen?

All I know is that my power bills keep going up a lot, taxes are likely to be raised, and the people are not happy about it - they're not happy about it one little bit. Doesn't stop them voting for the Greens, mind you in ever increasing numbers - they're getting about 23% of the vote at the moment. ( I say "they", by the way, not because I sympathise in any way with the crude, obnoxious, racialist stereotyping expressed in several of the comments above, but because as a British National I'm not allowed to vote. I am allowed to pay taxes, though, so that's alright then)

May 28, 2011 at 11:11 AM | Unregistered CommenterPaul Boyce

May 28, 2011 at 2:07 AM | Mique

http://wn.com/Don't_Let's_Be_Beastly_to_the_Germans

May 28, 2011 at 11:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterPFM

Today, the G in GISTOPO is Green. Beware of Germans carrying flags and banners and demanding a New Order. Haven't we been here before?

May 28, 2011 at 11:34 AM | Unregistered CommenterPascvaks

Could commenters please tone down the rhetoric a little.

May 28, 2011 at 11:45 AM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

These people have clearly been too engrossed in their need for German world domination again that they haven't read the recent headlines about the Middle East and what happens when you remove democracy. Idiots all of them

May 28, 2011 at 12:35 PM | Unregistered Commenterstephen richards

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that the good do nothing." I still think the Soviets put something "cool, man, cool" in the water and put the biggest doses in Germany, Italy, France, and California. I can't explain it, I've been to all those places, and I seem to be immune. Or... maybe it works by making me think that I'm immune, and thinking nothing can be done about it except blog, and everybody knows that blogging is the very bestest way to do nothing but still feel productive. Maybe it should now be, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that the good just blog, and blog, and blog." Oh this is just too TOO!! (There, I said it! I feel so much better. The World is saved!)

May 28, 2011 at 1:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterPascvaks

There was a recent post on WUWT referencing comments from both Obama and call me Dave that were rife with references to sustainability. There seems to be a source that is common to American Brigish and German politicians. Conspiracy theorists crank up your engines!

May 28, 2011 at 1:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

It was a worrying article, but I agree there is little chance of the global government foreseen by the WBGU taking any more economic shape than the current UN fiasco’s of the IPCC and UNFCCC, that led to Copenhagen and Cancun. But unilaterally, and perhaps in the EU, this type of dangerous and sinister prognostication could lead to legislation that is genuinely discriminating and anti-democratic.
How much more evidence do we need than when Vaclav Klaus concludes that “Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.”
The article itself refers to Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his concept of "volotonté générale" – of which I am unfamiliar - but to me the WBGU proposal opines much like Plato’s Philosopher Kings, where “internationally… a World Security Council for sustainability...” and “... members of the proposed future chamber… would explicitly not be chosen democratically…” would no doubt rule the planet in totalitarian fashion that demanded “sacrifice by both individuals and society that goes beyond the normal dimensions of the reality of life”.
Interestingly, the climate change narrative as described by the WBGU appears to be bound up in, and subservient to, the uber-concept of “sustainable development”, a much more pervasive and powerful set of political, economic and social messages. Fred Singer’s take on this is a good read:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/the_sustainable_development_ho.html
But is this WBGU proposal just another call for global governance and leadership by the UN in the face of the crippling exposures of green malfeasance, mounting agw skepticism and economic recession? When you look back at what Viscount Monckton was saying during his pre-COP 15 tour, those who guffawed his claims of world government as scaremongering are shown to be none the wiser when we have the officialdom of the WGBU promoting a suspension of global democracy and a global governance structure that requires the “problematization of unsustainable lifestyles". But then this language is very similar to the Club of Rome’s “problematique”:
http://quergeist.net/Problematique_Club-of-Rome.htm
… Just the same old stuck record, recycling old has-been philosophies, re-inventing and reframing debates, it’s just a chronic information cascade.
I am tempted to say that Germany has had a cultural affair with the type of ideological perspectives shown by the WBGU having been persuaded by “Lessons from the German experience by Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier:
http://books.google.com/books?id=GWTY0gLjwbAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
It’s very worrying that some of those sentiments appear live and kicking, but re-assuring that they are out in the open where they can be refuted and ridiculed.

May 28, 2011 at 1:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterJustin Ert

Welcome to Sparta, helots... while you are living in Sparta, we will teach you all how to live a lean life, quietly. In the end you will all see; that we won't let you worry about anything. Back to work now. You stupid, filthy, helots.

Progress is always pain-full, forward into the past?

May 28, 2011 at 2:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterTom

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>