NAZI GREENS - An Inconvenient History • Martin Durkin

a reply to: greencmp

You missed it.

You are looking at incumbent economic actors without making the connection to how and why their positions came to be.

a reply to: daskakik

Economic leaders come to their positions because they do their job well, the job of satisfying the needs of consumers.

Once there, they must daily reaffirm their market leadership position unless some other means of defending their hill can be had such as state protection from competition.

Capitalism doesn't begrudge success and it also doesn't respect "tradition", convention or have award ceremonies.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Interesting quote but I don't understand why you pegged it on the green agenda.

In the very first sentence he makes it clear that the scientific society serves the whole political spectrum in the same way.

What I take from it is that under an authoritarian government it is easier to control information. I don't think any one would disagree. Still, it doesn't say that a libertarian government or even anarchy is a guard against this. I know that some people have perfected the mental gymnastics that leads them to believe that they can be.

Well to your first point yes it does apply to the whole spectrum because science itself is apolitical. You seem to miss his entire point about socialism being better able at bringing this about because its very core involves central planning. How does the green agenda accomplish its goal without central planning or socialism? Then he goes on to list the human and individual aspects no matter how well intentioned or democratic as to why oligarchic systems will arise and become self serving for the state.

You act like capitalist are the ones pushing for bigger government but you have not acknowledged that the only way for a "green" agenda to be accomplished is through big government. If Nazism is composed of central planning and authoritarianism , big government, socialist collectivism, then how is the comparison false?

The way some have balked at the comparison in the OP you would think that authoritarianism would have 0 compatibility with environmentalism. If this is the case show me how environmentalism (green agenda)is accomplished through an anarchic or libertarian system? In other words how would environmentalism work without limiting freedom and central planning.

originally posted by: greencmp
Once there, they must daily reaffirm their market leadership position unless some other means of defending their hill can be had such as state protection from competition.

Exactly.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
Well to your first point yes it does apply to the whole spectrum because science itself is apolitical. You seem to miss his entire point about socialism being better able at bringing this about because its very core involves central planning. How does the green agenda accomplish its goal without central planning or socialism? Then he goes on to list the human and individual aspects no matter how well intentioned or democratic as to why oligarchic systems will arise and become self serving for the state.

Missed it? I reposted it and even said that I agreed.

You act like capitalist are the ones pushing for bigger government but you have not acknowledged that the only way for a "green" agenda to be accomplished is through big government. If Nazism is composed of central planning and authoritarianism , big government, socialist collectivism, then how is the comparison false?

Not all big government = Nazis. So, even if green agendas need big gov, it doesn't mean that it has to be as totalitarian as the nazi gov and therefore, not a valid comparison.

An honest statement would be "Nazis were environmentalists as well". Well, like greencmp pointed out, so was Thoreau but nobody is comparing him to Hitler.

The way some have balked at the comparison in the OP you would think that authoritarianism would have 0 compatibility with environmentalism. If this is the case show me how environmentalism (green agenda)is accomplished through an anarchic or libertarian system? In other words how would environmentalism work without limiting freedom and central planning.

That isn't the case so I don't know why you keep asking.

My point is that anarchic and libertarian systems don't exist and if one was put in place it wouldn't last.