30 July, 2009

Professor Rejects Green Marxism

Posted by Socrates in communism, global government, global warming, globalization, Marxism, Socrates at 6:54 pm | Permanent Link

Critical theory, global warming theory – what’s the difference besides the roots and the vines?

[Article].


  • 4 Responses to “Professor Rejects Green Marxism”

    1. Parsifal Says:
      31 July, 2009 at 6:27 am

      Even if “global warming” were really happening, it would hardly be a bad thing. During the Mesozoic Era, the Earth was so warm that there were palm trees in Alaska and Antarctica was a tropical paradise. What are these crybaby liberals demanding, a return to the Ice Age?

      If the libs were really serious about combating this non-existant problem, then they would be calling for a reduction in human population and the planting of more trees. But their real agenda is the establishment of a UN-run world government. “Global warming” is just the excuse they use to help establish that goal.

    2. 2050 Says:
      31 July, 2009 at 10:47 pm

      They have been calling for a reduction in population. That’s why China did the 1 child policy. The Amerikwans and Euros were convinced to do it voluntarily. They were of course the real targets. A little research around the UN websites and you will find very real population projections and goals. The ‘Population Bomb’ by Paul Erlich was big in the 70s. I think that stuff went on the back burner, because Feminism had won the hearts of our women, so whites were and are reducing themselves in numbers, and it was a perfect time to use the stabilization of national economies that the UN started pushing as a way to fill the void, and bring in millions of non-whites to take our place.
      It makes boring reading, but it’s all there. Even maps of what they would like the world to look like. It seems like I could not find Denver on the map. But, in a post white world, nature and animals would be better, then it won’t matter.

    3. Igor Alexander Says:
      1 August, 2009 at 3:05 am

      “But, in a post white world, nature and animals would be better, then it won’t matter.”

      Are you saying it would be better for whites to die off for the sake of preserving nature?

    4. Igor Alexander Says:
      1 August, 2009 at 4:52 am

      Kudos to The Vancouver Sun for having the cojones to print the truth about global warming (unfortunately, I think the paper is owned by the Aspers).