“Red Greta” Spills the Green Beans

Whether it’s because I’m a commentator, because I’m into politics, or because I’m just naturally skeptical about everything “they” say…

For years now, a lot of people — including readers like you — have grilled me on what I really think about global warming and climate change.

Do I believe it’s happening? Is humanity causing it? If so, what measures should we take, exactly?

To these questions, and others, I’ve always remained a little cagey. Not because I don’t have an opinion — or because I’m afraid to say what I truly think about it…

But because I refuse to get ensnared in the trap set by the globalist political left to keep us distracted from the true goals of their climate policy.

You see, they want millions of people like you and me — plus scientists, futurists, celebrities, politicians, and pundits — incessantly engaged in moral, ethical, and statistical combat about the climate…

Because they know this debate is an unwinnable pit-fight of dueling numbers and theories and viewpoints and agendas and emotions from which there is no escape, and in which the only real casualties are logic and objectivity.

The diabolical genius of this trap is that anyone who figures out the “master plan” behind it can end up looking like more of a crackpot than the biggest tree-hugging dirt-worshiper in the climate-change commune…

Because what reasonable person would believe that the Green Movement’s true objective is the destruction of capitalism, the end of Western democracy, and the redistribution of your money and mine to the third world?

Yet that’s exactly what they’re aiming to do. The evidence is there, if you look for it…

Plus “Red Greta” just accidentally told us so.

The first rule of Climate Club is: You don’t talk about Climate Club

You’ve seen Fight Club, right?

In that movie, a disgruntled “everyman” and his dissociated alter-ego form an underground club based on regular bouts of soul-cleansing fisticuffs. The rank-and-file members of this club are frequently dispatched to wreak minor mayhem against the corporate world, ostensibly to point out its emptiness and phoniness…

But what these pugilistic peons doesn’t realize is that their schizophrenic leader’s real goal is the mass destruction of credit institutions — and hence, virtually all consumer debt (yeah, it’s absurd and farcical, sort of like the U.N.).

In this respect, the Green Movement is a lot like Fight Club. Millions of young, naïve, hormonal foot-soldiers at the lower strata think they’re acting for the very simple and noble goal of saving the planet…

But their leaders’ objective is something else entirely — to crash the current system, shake down wealthier, more developed nations (especially the U.S.) for enormous sums of money, and install a quasi-communist global government like something out of Brave New World.

They’ve done a pretty good job of keeping this uber-agenda secret, too…

But on September 23rd, Swedish child activist Greta Thunberg — the new Tyler Durden of the climate change movement — inadvertently spilled the beans about this master plan in her speech at the U.N. Climate Action Summit.

Here’s one of the more telling excerpts:

“Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth.”

Aside from the fact that humans — the organism and related ecosystem that should count most to all of us — are definitely NOT on the verge of mass extinction (neither are polar bears, look it up)…

This quote should make it clear that the Green Movement really sees wealth and prosperity as the enemy. Because Greta’s contention is that continued economic growth (read: capitalism) spells fiery doom for the planet.

But a basic comparison of CO2 and GDP numbers doesn’t support this — in fact, they show the exact opposite.

Global Emissions

As you can see, from 2000 through 2014 (the latest full year’s worth of data on worldbank.org), the global CO2-to-GHG ratio fell by 35.78%.

In other words, the world produced steadily less CO2 for every dollar of prosperity it created over this 15-year span.

But that’s not all this basic data shows…

Over this same time period, both China and the United States (the two nations most vilified by the green crowd) handily beat this global average decline.

For China, the CO2/GDP ratio fell by 38.89%. And for the U.S., it fell by an impressive 45.95%. Again, this means the world — and especially its two biggest so-called “polluter” nations — is getting steadily better over time at creating more wealth and prosperity with radically less greenhouse gas emissions.

So clearly, we can continue the “fairy tale” of economic growth without baking the planet to a crisp (if that’s even a danger — the data is far from conclusive).

But that point dovetails into another telltale excerpt from Greta’s speech:

“How dare you continue to look away and come here saying that you’re doing enough, when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight.”

My translation of this little snippet is two-fold — we’ll take the second part first, for reasons that’ll become clear in a moment…

In keeping with the Green Movement’s standard MO of propaganda-is-reality (sound familiar, comrade?), the “solutions” are in sight, and they have been for years.

The world’s number one source of CO2 emissions is electricity generation. And as I just finished proving in a recent two-part article series, nuclear energy is more than capable of meeting the lion’s share of global electricity demand…

Without producing a single unit of carbon dioxide.

Supplemented with clean-burning natural gas, tried-and-true hydro — plus wind and solar tossed into the mix — nuclear power could totally solve the global warming crisis (if it exists), as it’s currently described by the Greenies.

The France example proves it. With the bulk of their power coming from nuke, their CO2/GDP ratio is nearly 60% less than the global average.

Boom. Done. Problem solved. But NOOOO…

We can’t just solve this problem and be done with it, can we?

And why not?

Because actually solving the climate change “crisis” would prevent the U.N. from being able to gouge the industrialized nations of the world for hundreds of billions of dollars (soon trillions, if they get their way)…

And make no mistake — that’s exactly what they’ve been trying to do, with varying degrees of success, since the 1980s.

According to the IEA, the world needs $90 trillion in green infrastructure spending over the next 15 years, most of it in poor, corrupt, or “developing” countries that are given pretty much free reign to pollute…

Who do you think they’re going to hit up for that money?

Mainly America, Canada, Japan, the EU, and the independent industrialized nations of Europe, that’s who.

This is precisely why Red Greta said in her speech that the “politics” to solve the global warming problem as she describes it are nowhere in sight.

Translation: The Green leadership knows that without a decisive move toward a global-focused form of neo-communism in these wealthy western nations…

The kind of radical transfer of wealth and power they lust after could never happen.

Because to achieve it, approximately 1.3 billion currently prosperous people would have to completely abandon the wealth and comfort they enjoy under capitalism…

Willingly forfeit their hard-earned fortunes to a bunch of far-flung third-world backwater nations (and of course, the U.N. itself, as administrator)…

And submit to a massive, insidious world-government that controls everything.

This cannot happen under anything resembling free-market democracy.

Bottom line: “Climate change” is simply the conceptual means to a political end.

And just like every other nefarious propaganda campaign through history — like “the motherland” or “the master race” — whether it’s true or not doesn’t matter…

What matters is that its powerful message can make millions of gullible people sacrifice their rights, their money, and even their lives for it.

But I’m sure not going to be one of them. Are you?

Warmly Yours,

Jim Amrhein

Jim Amrhein
Freedoms Editor, Whiskey & Gunpowder
WhiskeyAndGunpowderFeedback@StPaulResearch.com

You May Also Be Interested In:

My Lunch with John Bolton

Today, Bryon King reminisces about his lunch with recently fired National Security Advisor John Bolton, and gives clues to where Trump’s foreign policy goes next…

Jim Amrhein

Just like he was 15 years ago, when first he sullied the pages of the original Whiskey & Gunpowder e-Letter and various other forums, Jim is still ornery, opinionated, politically incorrect, and shamelessly patriotic. He’s also more convinced than ever before that government can’t do much of anything right — except expand in scope and...

View More By Jim Amrhein