Thread: AOCs Chief of Staff Admits: Green New Deal About Socialism, Not Climate

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Chief of Staff Admits: Green New Deal About Socialism, Not Climate



Facebook/ Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Joel B. Pollak11 Jul 2019 162:46

Saikat Chakrabarti, the chief of staff and former campaign mastermind for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), reportedly admitted that the “Green New Deal” was not originally about climate change, but changing the economy.

That claim comes from Sam Ricketts, who directs climate change policy for for Washington Governor Jay Inslee, one of the two dozen candidates for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Ricketts met with Chakrabarti this spring to make acquaintances after Ocasio-Cortez called Inslee’s climate change plan the “gold standard” in policy.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday:

Chakrabarti had an unexpected disclosure. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal,” he said, “is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.” Ricketts greeted this startling notion with an attentive poker face. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

That report confirms early analysis of the Green New Deal by Breitbart News in February. After “democratic socialist” Ocasio-Cortez introduced the plan, this author wrote (original links):

As predicted, it is pure socialism.
…
Furthermore, the authors say they will proceed “through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives [are we literally in the Soviet Union now?], civil society groups, academia, and businesses.”
…
The Green New Deal will also “guarantee” a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people [note: not “citizens” or even “legal residents”] of the United States.” It will also provide “high-quality health care”; “affordable, safe, and adequate housing”; and health and affordable food.” And it bans unfair “domination and competition” from monopolies — except the state, of course.

Chakrabarti is currently under fire from members of the Congressional Black Caucus for accusing moderate Democrats of behaving like segregationists.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

https://www.breitbart.com/environmen...edium=facebook

Thread: The Greatest Political Psyop of the Decade & Most Dangerous, too

Rush was talking about this a few days ago!



pjmedia.com

AOC Chief of Staff: Green New Deal 'Wasn't Originally a Climate Thing at All'

lllllllllll

The Misanthropic Bankers Behind The Green New Deal



A vast sweeping change towards a “green economy” is now being pushed by forces that may make an educated citizen rather uncomfortable...

Sun, 08/11/2019 - 20:45
1SHARES

Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

A vast sweeping change towards a “green economy” is now being pushed by forces that may make an educated citizen rather uncomfortable...

Of course, news reports flash daily showcasing the brave young movement of “eco-warriors” led by Sweden’s 16 year old Greta Thunberg or America’s 17 year old Jamie Margolin who have become a force across Europe and America leading such movements as the Extinction Rebellion, This is Zero Hour, the Sunrise Movement and Children’s eco-crusade. The young face of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez daily sells the idea that the only way for outdated capitalist forces that have plagued the world for decades to be replaced is by imposing a sweeping Green New Deal that priorities de-carbonization as a goal for humanity rather than continuing to allow the mindless forces of the markets to determine our destiny.

EU President Ursula von der Leyen has even attacked China’s Belt and Road Initiative (which is ironically representing a true 21st century New Deal) by saying “some are buying their influence by investing in dependence from ports and roads”… but “we go the European way”. What is the “European way”? Not the development plans of Charles De Gaulle or Konrad Adenauer who envisioned industrial growth and increasing population as positives, but rather a Green New Deal. Von der Leyen said on July 17 that “I want Europe to become the first CO2 neutral continent in the world by 2050! I will put forward a Green New Deal for Europe in my first 100 days in office…”
Attacking the “mindless forces of the market” and vested power structures of capitalism are not bad things to do… but why must we de-carbonize? Re-regulating the too-big-to-fail banks is long overdue, but why do so many assume that a “Green New Deal” won’t just empower those same forces that have run havoc upon the world for the past half century and just cause more death and starvation than has already been suffered under Globalization?
One might only think to even ask such questions by first confronting the uncomfortable fact that behind such young cardboard cut outs as Thunberg, Margolin, Cortez or the Green New Deal are figures whom one would not associate with humanitarianism by any measure.
Green Bonds and Oligarchs


When we begin to pull back the curtain we quickly run into figures like Prince Charles, who recently met with the heads of 18 Commonwealth countries to consolidate climate emergency legislation which was promptly passed in the UK and Canadian Parliaments. At the end of the meeting Charles said that we “have 18 months to save the world from climate change” and called for “increasing the amount of private sector finance flowing towards the supporting sustainable development throughout the commonwealth”.
Following the royal decree, the Bank of England and some of the dirtiest banks in the Rothschild-City of London web of finance have promoted “green financial instruments” led by Green Bonds to redirect pension plans and mutual funds towards green projects that no one in their right minds would ever invest in willfully. The Ecological, Social, Governance Index (ESGI) has now been set up across 51% of Germany’s banks including the derivatives-bomb waiting to blow named Deutschebank. Leading bankers supporting the ESGI like Mark Carney of the Bank of England have said that over 6.5 trillion Euros could be mobilized under this new index (which currently accounts for about $160 billion). The creation of these “green bonds” run hand-in-hand with the Bail-in mechanisms which have now been implemented across the trans-Atlantic nations in order to steal trillions of dollars of from pension funds, RRSPs and Mutual funds the next time a bail out is needed to prop up the “too big to fails” which currently sit atop a $1.2 trillion derivatives bubble waiting to blow.
On top of heading the Bank of England, former Goldman Sachs-man Carney has also endorsed the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures which was created in 2015 and was used as a guideline for the UK government’s July 2019 White Paper “Green Finance Strategy: Transforming Finance for a Greener Future”. The White Paper proposed to “consolidate the UK’s position as a global hub for green finance and positioning the UK at the head of green financial innovation and data and analytics… endorsed by institutions representing $118 trillion of assets globally”. The Carney-led Task Force also spawned the Green Finance Initiativein 2016 which is now a primary vehicle designed to divert international capital flows into green tech.
Carney’s former employer at Goldman Sachs has also created a “Green Index for ‘virtuous investing” including two new sustainability indices to promote heavy investment in to green infrastructure called CDP Environment EW and CDP Eurozone EW. The acronym CDP originates from the Climate Disclosure Project – a London-based think tank that generated Goldman Sachs’ program. Goldman Sachs’ Marine Abiad promoted the CDP index saying on July 10 “we are convinced that sustainable finance enables financial markets to play a virtuous role in the economy.”
Just in case you thought the Extinction Rebellion was somehow untouched by the hand of social engineers, a leading figure behind the movement named Alex Evans was a former consultant on the Prince’s International Sustainability Unit, and co-author of the US National Intelligence Council’s Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World which became an environmental/foreign policy blueprint for the Obama Administration in 2008. Currently Evans also runs the Collective Psychology Project “where psychology meets politics”.
Other leading British intelligence figures managing the Extinction Rebellion movement included Farhana Yamin and Sam Gaell of Chatham House (the controlling institution behind the New York Council on Foreign Relations).
Could a ‘Benevolent’ Green Dictatorship be a Good Thing?

The devil’s advocate speaks: Can’t we presume that these central banks, oligarchs and hedge fund managers just care about the environment? So what if they are trying to modify humanity’s behaviour in order to save the environment? After all, humanity itself is a selfish, gluttonous pollution-making machine and isn’t better for everyone if those enlightened elite just transform the world economy so that we consume less, and think more about the future?
If this line of thinking approximates something you’ve felt inside yourself then you’ve been brainwashed.
Of course, the world has turned into a consumerist cult over the past few decades which has sacrificed long term thinking for short term gain and of course we need a re-organization of the system. Thunberg and the Green New Dealers aren’t wrong about that stuff. That’s all fine and dandy.
But if you think that going along with the types of reform that aspires to put dollar values on reducing carbon footprints or spreading low quality (and very expensive) windmills and solar panels across the globe with the expectation that somehow these sources of energy will not cause a vast collapse of industrial capacity of civilization(and an associated loss of capacity to sustain human life), then you are fooling yourself. One kilowatt of windmill energy is only the same as one kilowatt of nuclear power when applied to a mathematical equation but not in real life. When applied to capital-intensive work functions needed to melt industrial steel, run machine tools, power a vast agro-industrial complex, high speed rail system or construct things like Belt and Road Initiative, “green” energy sources do not come even close to cutting the iron.
The issue has always been population control

The oligarchs running the “grand green design” since the Club of Rome’s Sir Alexander King began the Limits to Growth study in 1970 knew that green “low energy flux density” sources of energy would constrict global population and that is exactly what they wanted. Sir King said so much in 1990 when he wrote “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
Sir King was, after all just following the lead of UNESCO founder (and Eugenics president) Sir Julian Huxley who wrote in 1946 “Political unification in some sort of world government will be required… Even though… any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”
It was only a few years later that Huxley would co-found the World Wildlife Fund alongside Prince Philip Mountbatten and Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands. All three were present at Bernhardt’s founding meeting of the Bilderberg group to advance this grand conversion of society into a willful self-extermination in 1954 and while Huxley wasn’t present in 1970, the other two oligarchs co-founded the 1001 Nature Trust alongside 999 other wealthy misanthropes to fund the blossoming environmental movement. These forces were also behind the coup d’état in America which put the Trilateral Commission in power under Jimmy Carter and unleashed the “controlled disintegration of the US economy” from 1978-1982 (this will be the topic of another study). This grouping, led by Zbigniew Brzezinski not only played the radical Islam card against the Soviet Union, but also established a program of population reduction through the promotion of green energy sources long before it was popular.
The oligarchs that are currently trying to reform humanity today don’t care about the environment. Prince Philip and Bernhardt have been recorded to have killed more endangered species on safari than most people have killed mosquitos. They just don’t like people. Especially thinking people. Thinking people who question how and why arbitrary rules are applied to justify wars, poverty and oligarchism which destroys lives both now and in the future.
The Belt and Road Initiative and the tendency to grow the human population both quantitatively and qualitatively which such great projects entail is the target of the Green New Deal.
The legacy of scientific and technological progress that launched western civilization out of a dark age and into a renaissance in the 15th century is under attack because it is that lost ethic which the oligarchy KNOWS may yet be awoken and which would bring the west into harmony with the Russia-China program for growth and development under a philosophy of “win-win cooperation” both on Earth and also in space.
The effects of the ideas of the renaissance coincided with the greatest rate of discoveries of universal principles as mankind sought to come to know the mind of god by studying the book of nature with a heart of love and attitude of humility exemplified in the figure of Leonardo Da Vinci. The explosion of new technologies that arose not only revolutionized astronomy, medicine and engineering but gave birth to the modern industrial economy which coincided with the greatest rise of population in history. This exponential rise has been used by Malthusians for centuries as the proof that mankind is “just another cancerous growth” on the “purity of mother Gaia”.
So if you don’t agree with humans=cancer philosophy and want something a bit more optimistic in your life, then support a real New Deal today.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...green-new-deal

Green misanthropy: They want us dead

In their own words....

August 13, 2019
By John Dale Dunn

I like to remind people that the enviros, top to bottom, side to side, are misanthropists; they consider the human race a cancer on the planet. They hope to achieve a planetary wildlife park where the only humans allowed are the park rangers, who belong to their federation of environmental exclusives.
Here’s a good sampling of the attitudes of enviro fanatics, with the proviso that the current human population on planet earth is north of 5 billion and these statements are only a small sample of the larger environmentalist position on population and human habitation of the planet Earth:

David Brower, founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."
Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."
Susan Blakemore, a UK Guardian science journalist: "For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed."
Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".
Bill Gates, Microsoft billionaire, funder of enviro causes: "The world today has 6.8 billion people...that's headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent."
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, architect of the new Germanic masterplan, the 'Great Transformation': "When you imagine that if all these 9 billion people claim all these resources, then the earth will explode.”
Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity marine biologist, French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."
These doomsday proclamations are contradicted by reality; the quality of life on the planet has actually improved with an increase in population, as well established by studies of economic historian Julian Simon, who makes the case that a critical mass of humans is necessary for progress and creative development, as shown by the last two centuries of tremendous human development and improvements in quality of life across the planet.
Is it possible these enviros are, like most on the left, people who claim to care about the human race but don’t really care about human beings—and are misanthropic to the core as an ideological mind set—concerned about an abstraction, the human collective, but unconcerned about real live humans?
Graphic credit: Pixabay
The author is a physician and inactive attorney in Brownwood, Texas.

I like to remind people that the enviros, top to bottom, side to side, are misanthropists; they consider the human race a cancer on the planet. They hope to achieve a planetary wildlife park where the only humans allowed are the park rangers, who belong to their federation of environmental exclusives.
Here’s a good sampling of the attitudes of enviro fanatics, with the proviso that the current human population on planet earth is north of 5 billion and these statements are only a small sample of the larger environmentalist position on population and human habitation of the planet Earth:
David Brower, founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."
Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."
Susan Blakemore, a UK Guardian science journalist: "For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed."

Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".
Bill Gates, Microsoft billionaire, funder of enviro causes: "The world today has 6.8 billion people...that's headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent."
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, architect of the new Germanic masterplan, the 'Great Transformation': "When you imagine that if all these 9 billion people claim all these resources, then the earth will explode.”
Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity marine biologist, French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."
These doomsday proclamations are contradicted by reality; the quality of life on the planet has actually improved with an increase in population, as well established by studies of economic historian Julian Simon, who makes the case that a critical mass of humans is necessary for progress and creative development, as shown by the last two centuries of tremendous human development and improvements in quality of life across the planet.
Is it possible these enviros are, like most on the left, people who claim to care about the human race but don’t really care about human beings—and are misanthropic to the core as an ideological mind set—concerned about an abstraction, the human collective, but unconcerned about real live humans?
Graphic credit: Pixabay
The author is a physician and inactive attorney in Brownwood, Texas.


Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...t_us_dead.html