Phony ‘Justice’ Through Phony Climate Policy
Would you be surprised to learn that of the five goals pronounced in the so-called “Green New Deal,” three of them focus on some form of social or economic “justice?”
Or that the two that don’t instead use language right out of the UN’s globalist playbook? Well, they do, and, if you’ve been paying attention, you shouldn’t be all that surprised.
Indeed, the convergence of climate “science” and social “justice” is nothing new. Some argue that it dates back to 1972 when an unlikely blend of legitimate environmental activists, dyed-in-the-wool Marxists, and assorted anti-establishment 60’s leftovers met in Stockholm, Sweden, to discuss the planet’s ills.
And from that marriage of global environmental and social-justice concerns was born the IPCC’s parent organization – the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and its socialist-environmentalist manifesto – the Stockholm Declaration.
Others point to the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (a.k.a. the Earth Summit).
There, the event’s Secretary-general, Maurice Strong, told the opening session that industrialized countries had “developed and benefited from the unsustainable patterns of production and consumption which have produced our present dilemma.”
Yes, this was the gathering which spawned the infamous Agenda 21 [PDF], a global contract that pledged governments around the world to a UN plan to change the way people “live, eat, learn and communicate” all in the name of “saving the earth” from mankind’s mistakes, particularly global warming. (See IPCC: International Pack of Climate Crooks for details).
But these were non-binding international agreements typically not worth the paper they were then written on, not proposed legislation for a sovereign nation which would immediately impact the lives and well-being of hundreds of millions of citizens.
And yet, the draft released last Thursday by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass, of their “Green New Deal” Bill was, in fact, as long on “social justice” as it was short on common sense.
Its rough framework first claims not one, but two crises — a climate crisis purportedly caused by manmade greenhouse gas emissions and an economic crisis of wage stagnation and growing inequality.
And, while it fails to establish either, according to its preamble, the Green New Deal can address both.
Five Steps to Solving Both Crises
The five goals described in H. Res 109, Paragraph 1, Subparagraphs (A) through (E) are, with my emphasis:
- To achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers
- To create millions of good, high-wage jobs and ensure prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States
- To invest in the infrastructure and industry of the United States to sustainably meet the challenges of the 21st century
- To secure for all people of the United States for generations to come:
- clean air and water;
- climate and community resiliency;
- healthy food;
- Access to nature;
- A sustainable environment
- To promote justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of ‘‘frontline and vulnerable communities.”
Conspicuously missing from the resolution was the promise of “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work,” found in its accompanying “overview.” Perhaps it’s destined to be subtly “airdropped” in later.
And if expressions the likes of “sustainably meet the challenges of the 21stcentury” and “sustainable environment” sound familiar, they should.
The expressed goal of Agenda 21 was “achieving global sustainable development in the 21st Century.”
The term is lib-speak for tackling “poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice” as a single issue with essentially a lone antagonist.
Surely, many of these individual goals are genuine and quite laudable; still, many have no place in a piece of U.S. Climate Legislation.
So once again, we’re faced with a fraudulent attempt to address the left’s laundry list of woes in the name of meting out imaginary “climate justice.”
The Fake Victims List Grows
And just who are the “frontline and vulnerable communities” mentioned several times throughout the text? It’s simply another term championed by “climate justice” organizations.
These groups no longer deny their treatment of climate change as a political, ethical, and ultimately a reparations (wealth-redistribution) issue, rather than one that is environmental or physical in nature.
As enumerated in the GND, these communities include:
- indigenous peoples
- communities of color
- migrant communities
- deindustrialized communities
- depopulated rural communities
- the poor
- low-income workers
- the elderly
- the unhoused
- people with disabilities
- and youth
That’s quite a list. In fact, if they can agree upon exactly which group the sanctuary illegal immigrants belong in and then throw in the LGBTQ community, they’ll have included the entire Leftie Fake-Victims List.
And according to Paragraph 3, these “victims,” along with labor unions and other progressive darlings will be guaranteed a place at the table for all decisions made in the development and execution of this GND.
What’s more, surely the addition of the latest outraged victims class (women) puts the fake victims well into the majority.
In fact, only Well-Off Non-Migratory Properly-Housed And Gainfully-Employed Straight Middle-Aged White Males (WONMPHAGESMAWM’s) are excluded.
It’ll be fun to watch such liberal economics luminaries as Paul Krugman explain how that will work. I suppose as long as the richest one percent (likely WONMPHAGESMAWM’s anyway) pay their “fair share” we should be just fine.
Read rest at American Thinker
Trackback from your site.