Tuesday, December 22, 2009

The victims of Climate Change (Legislation)

Because people might die from the effects of climate change in the future, Governments are ensuring that people die today. Australian farmer Peter Spencer has entered his 30th day of a hunger strike against the Oz.Gov. Why? Their laws - enacted to comply with the Kyoto Treaty - prevent him from making a living on his own land.

The Australian government pledged to cut the amount of Carbon Dioxide produced in their country. Rather than take the politically unpopular approach of reducing the amount of fossil fuels burned by the energy and transport sectors (by far the biggest producers of CO2), they've chosen to encourage "carbon sequestration" (the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere) by promoting the growth of forest.

By "promoting the growth of forest", I mean "prohibit landowners from cutting down any trees or brush". As a result, vast portions of Australia are returning to scrub, and farmers who once made their living by, well, farming are now destitute. You see, the Oz.Gov refuses to compensate them for the fact that their land is now worthless, because you can't farm it.

Mr. Spencer decided enough is enough. Ignored by the Oz.Gov and the courts, he's making a statement with his life and health. The Personal is Political, indeed. So far, the Oz.Gov is watching him die:
A spokesman for Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has warned hunger striking Monaro district grazier, Peter Spencer, will not succeed in changing government policy over compensation of farmers for land clearing restrictions.

The response means Mr Spencer (pictured), of “Saarahnlee”, who entered the 30th day of a hunger strike on a wind monitoring tower on his property on Tuesday, could become a self-elected martyr to his cause.

He has repeatedly vowed not to end the hunger strike until Mr Rudd agrees to pay himself and other farmers billions of dollars in compensation over land clearing restrictions and the role the restrictions have played in ensuring Australia met Kyoto Protocol carbon emission targets.

But Mr Rudd’s spokesman said: “The Government sets policy in the national interest.


But supporter of Mr Spencer and Cobar district grazier, Alastair McRobert, said the national interest would be “if the Commonwealth upheld the people’s constitution and paid farmers for the benefits (from the carbon) that have been stolen from them”.

Constitution, schmonstitution. The Ozzie PM is trying to pose for the Cameras in Copenhagen.

The Environmental Movement was once about cleaning up filthy rivers, and preventing people from dieing from smog attacks like the Great Smog of London. When they did so, they found great success in persuading the people to support their agenda. No more. As we've cleaned up the most egregious waste, the Environmental Movement has set their sights on bigger game. If some people now believe that the goal is depopulating the land, and reducing overall populations and standard of living, the professional environmentalists have nobody to blame but themselves. Their literature is filled with this sort of thing:
You shouldn't have a dog because of its carbon footprint.

A little malnutrition is good for the children. OK, it's not, but it's good for Mother Gaia.

Better no jobs than non-Green jobs.
For a movement founded in the innocence of youthful enthusiasm, the cycle is now complete. The once downy-cheeked crusaders are now The Man. Thirty years from now, we'll look back on Kevin Rudd much like we look back on Herbert Asquith, Prime Minister of England in 1914: out of his depth, but too wedded to his world view to save a generation from destruction.

Via Joanne Nova.

No comments: