I have long believed that the whole ‘global warming’ movement is completely spurious. Climates change, and anything that we might might or might not do to combat this will influence the natural state of things not a jot. The proponents of such actions claim the high moral ground, and tell us that we must protect the world for future generations. I suggest that if they had their way the world would be rendered virtually uninhabitable for the human race. Perhaps that is what they really want!
If not malign they are, at best naive. Governments, whose principal objective is to exert as much control over the populace as they possibly can, are only too eager to embrace the environmentalists’ crazy theories to help their cause. No matter what they say publically, freedom is a dirty word for these people. I believe that the cause of the environmentalists has been helped enormously by the fact that their main opponent on the world stage has been George W Bush. There has rarely been a man who was so unfitted for high office and yet attained it, but he was right about global warming.
Take transport. Man’s enterprise and industry has made it possible for us to travel to every corner of the globe within a day. We even have the ability to leave it and explore other worlds. It is one of the greatest of all freedoms and therefore must be quashed. If you really must have your own vehicle we, the state, are going to do all that we can to make sure that you don’t use it. We say that we want you to use public transport but then we discover that there isn’t any.
Most of this stuff emanates from London, where the last sentence sounds ridiculous. If I lived in London I would be only too pleased to travel on the excellent transport system, and would question the need to own my own car. Out here in the real world, where 90% of us live, the notion that we could rely on the public transport system to get around is quite ludicrous. Furthermore, the sketchy network that exists is so overloaded that prices have to raised to criminal levels in order to dissuade us from using it.
The irony of all this is that this great freedom; the freedom to travel; is increasingly becoming the exclusive preserve of the wealthy.
There are so many other areas in which governments, encouraged by the environmentalists, seek to exert more and more control over us. The recycling/waste issue is one which leaves me in despair and I do not propose to dwell long on it. But the notion that our elected councils should penalise us for mistakenly placing a piece of rubbish in the wrong container, and that we should pay people to check up on whether we do so, is, frankly, obscene.
The latest stance by the environmentalists, however, puts everything that has come before it into the shade. The absurdly pompous Jonathan Porritt, the governments’s green adviser, has decreed that couples who produce more than two children are being irresponsible. We could easily take the argument down the lines of other ‘authorities’ who have attempted population engineering; the Nazis, for instance; but in some ways it is good that he has come out with this garbage. It blows the gaff on the whole thing and demonstrates that control is the objective.
You see, Mr Porritt, reproduction is not something that man has developed; a freedom that he has laboured for, like travel. Like all animals, man’s two most basic instincts are to feed, and to reproduce in order to maintain the species. Any attempt, by any authority, to interfere with this is sinister in the extreme.
Where will these future generations; for whom we are told we must protect the environment; come from? Mr Porritt, like most of his ilk, gives me the impression that he loves the world but hates people.
