It occurred to me this week, as I hung some laundry to dry, that I might be engaged in an exercise in futility when it comes to green living.
You see, green living fascinates me. So does zero-waste, frugality and a low carbon-footprint lifestyle. It seems counterintuitive to admit this while being a constitutional conservative, but there you go. I enjoy the challenge, I guess.
After I hung the laundry to dry (I haven't used a clothes drier in decades), I came inside and saw this article: "As Woke Corporations and Celebs Demand We Drive Less and Eat Bugs, They're Quietly the Worst Polluters On Earth" by Matt Agorist.
"Last year, Google launched a climate initiative to help us lowly peasant class reduce our carbon footprint," notes Agorist. "Inaccurately laying the blame for carbon pollution on the individual, Google is engaging in a disingenuous practice that is common among elite mega-corporations. Though, collectively, individual humans certainly add to pollution, the individual is statistically blameless. A single person's carbon footprint is essentially non-existent compared to the likes of massive corporations and even single elite individuals who own private jets. This is an extremely inconvenient truth for those who stand at their pulpits and demean the common folks for causing global warming – while they literally create more carbon in just hours than most people do in an entire year. Lest we forget, these are the same people telling us to eat bugs."
The article goes on to address an endless stream of the Rich and Famous who chastise the lowly peasants for wanting a hamburger once in a while, as they themselves engage in planet-killing practices we can only dream about.
And yet, their hypocrisy never seems to disturb them. No matter how often he's called to task, Leonardo DiCaprio refuses to stop flying his private jet to conferences on global warming. John Kerry famously flew a private jet to Iceland to pick up an award for climate leadership. And don't get me started on Al Gore, whose climate-change hypocrisy is the stuff of legend. Next to these giants, my puny efforts to air-dry our laundry and reduce our garbage output seem like a colossal waste of time.
It seems the bigger (famous or wealthy) the figure, the more extreme the hypocrisy. "Like most people of a certain worldview," notes Cal Thomas, "[Bill] Gates tries to have it both ways. He says, 'It's true that my carbon footprint is absurdly high. For a long time I have felt guilty about this.' The message? You can continue to live like a plutocrat, as long as you feel guilty about it and donate money to organizations and causes favored by your ideological fellow travelers. Gates adds, 'I am aware that I'm an imperfect messenger on climate change … so who am I to lecture anyone on the environment?'"
Yeah, good question, Bill. Over and over and over again, these elite celebrities and politicians lecture us on how we must sacrifice to save the planet while they do the exact opposite. Those preaching the loudest are usually the biggest hypocrites. Rules for thee, not for me.
But climate activism can take a darker turn. In a very interesting video made by PragerU called the "Religion of Green," it postulates that mankind has a deep-seated need for a higher power. With the decline (or suppression) of traditional religions, people still need something to believe in, so progressives started worshiping nature and constructing the Religion of Green. The No. 1 principle for this new faith is submission to the agenda. A new morality has been constructed (no meat, no cars, no planes, etc.), using fear as the motivator.
This "magical thinking" – that wind and solar are zero-impact and can replace fossil fuels, that recycling is low-impact and cost-effective, etc. – is a hallmark of the Religion of Green. Meanwhile, the predicted catastrophes of planetary doom over the past 50 years have missed the mark every single time.
That doesn't stop them from using fear as a tool. Gin up the potential apocalyptic catastrophes if "X" isn't accomplished, and people will do almost anything – hand over all their money, refuse to have children (or abort if they get pregnant), shuffle into tight "pack and stack" urban centers – to prevent the apocalypse from happening.
These are familiar tactics to tyrants throughout history. This time, however, the Religion of Green has painted all of humanity as the enemy – except, of course, the messianic figures of the political elites who will Save the World through their legislative efforts. No wonder they feel entitled to their private jets.
This goal of submission is not just in America, but around the globe. The Religion of Green demands a lower human population, which everyone knows has been a leftist objective for decades ("Humans are a cancer" "People are parasites"). But who decides who dies for the good of the planet? Not to be Captain Obvious here, but I doubt it's going to be the elites or their families. Instead it will be us, the peasants.
Remember, the issue is never the issue. The stated goal is never the goal. We're told we have to give up meat and cars and guns and air travel "for the greater good" by the very people who refuse to do the same. This is a classic tactic of communism, where the peons struggle but the elites live in luxury. As one pundit put it, "This is not unity or bipartisanship. This is straight-up communism."
And this point communism is precisely where we're headed on a worldwide scale as climate-change becomes the international cause célèbre. "Green" means nothing to the elites; it's just a tool.
But who will serve the elites if the planet is depopulated and returned to some mythical Eden? Who will grow the food, manufacture the goods, and clean the toilets for the overlords? When I posed that hypothetical question to my husband, his answer was succinct and accurate: "These are the people who would rather rule in hell than serve in heaven."
Ironically, the "green" message would spread much further and wider if the elites weren't such hypocrites about it. That's why it's obvious the issue is not the issue. So yeah, my efforts at green living seem futile when compared to this massive hypocrisy and crazy agenda.
Still, I'll continue hanging laundry. I've always said we don't live like we do to save Gaia. We live like we do because we prefer to make a light mark on God's green earth and treat His resources with respect. The Bill Gateses and Al Gores of the world can put that in their pipe and smoke it.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
The post With the elites' hypocrisy, why should I try to live green? appeared first on WND.