Climate Movement Drops Mask, Admits Communist Agenda

[Whatshername]

Any thinking person who is still buying this "climate change is man-made" crap needs to take a good, hard look at who they've aligned themselves with ideologically... communists, socialists, revolutionaries and progs.  Please WAKE UP!  The issue is never the issue... the issue is always the revolution.

 

 

CLIMATE MOVEMENT DROPS MASK, ADMITS COMMUNIST AGENDA

 

Communists along with a few environmental groups staged a “People’s Climate Rally” in Oakland, California on Sunday, September 21, in conjunction with the larger “People’s Climate March” in New York City on the same day.

 

Wait — did I say communists? Isn’t that a bit of an exaggeration?

 

Well…no.

 

At the New York event, many people noticed that gee, there sure are a lot of communists at this march. But in Oakland — always on the cutting edge — the entire “climate change” movement at last fully, irrevocably and overtly embraced communism as its stated goal. Any concerns about “optics” or operating in “stealth mode” were abandoned.

 

The “climate change” “crisis” is now nothing but the latest justification for “total revolution” and getting rid of capitalism forever.

 

Yes, capitalism itself is the problem. The primary message of the People’s Climate Rally was this: Climate change is caused by capitalism, and merely attempting to reform capitalism will not stop global warming; it is impossible to work within the existing system if we want to save the planet. We must replace it with a new social and economic system entirely.

 

Until recently, those attacking the capitalist system as the cause of global warming were intentionally a little vague as to what will replace it if we are to solve the problem. But on Sunday in Oakland, that curtain was drawn back and the new system was finally revealed: Communism. Or at least hardcore socialism as Marx defined it — the necessary transitional phase before true complete communism (i.e. no private property, no families, no individualism). Most countries we tend to think of as “communist” actually self-defined as “socialist”: The USSR, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, for example, was (as its name reveals) socialist. I point out this detail in case anybody reading this article thinks that the “socialism” advocated at the rally was merely some kind of squishy soft-hearted semi-capitalism; no, it is the same type of socialism one finds in places generally thought of as communist.

 

Below you will find irrefutable proof that communist ideologies, organizations and phraseologies have completely moved to the forefront of the “climate change” movement. (I was originally tempted to say that the communists, as they are wont to do, have merely “co-opted” environmentalism. But that would imply that the goal of global warming scaremongering was something other than “destroying capitalism” in the first place. At this point I now know that destroying capitalism has always been the goal; the only thing that changed on Sunday is that the mask was dropped.)

 

This proof will necessarily entail posting a lot of photographs; in situations like this, the only way to conclusively demonstrate a point is through repetition of evidence. One could summarize the evidence with a few shorthand images, but that would leave open the possibility that the case was being overstated. To quash that counter-argument before it arises, I will post lots and lots and lots and lots of images from all over the rally, from the sponsors, to the attendees, to the booths, to the speakers, to show beyond any doubt that the entire rally was thoroughly saturated with communism and socialism to the point where these ideologies were the overarching theme of the event.

 

Ready? All the photos below were taken at the People’s Climate Rally in Oakland on September 21, 2014.

 

As you enter the rally you encounter booths hosted by Socialist Action, a Trotskyist/Marxist group…

 

…and the Communist Party USA, a Marxist-Leninist political party who like to think of themselves as the communists, since they’ve been around for almost a century…

 

…and the Revolutionary Communist Party USA, a Maoist political cult devoted to overthrowing the United States in a total revolution.

 

Along the way, you encounter the rally’s attendees, carrying signs advocating concepts like…

 

…”eco-socialism,” which I nominate as “word of the day,” since the theme of the rally was the fusion of ecology with socialism.

 

“Another Big, Fat, straight, Midwestern, White Man for WORLD REVOLUTION.”

 

“Capitali$m is Destroying the Environment.”

 

Do I even need to point out that socialist and communist countries like China, the Soviet Union, North Korea and elsewhere have absolutely appalling environmental histories, past present and future, which far exceed in ecological destruction anything encountered in capitalist societies? No, I don’t need to point that out, because you already know it. You do — but apparently the people at this rally live in a fantasy world where “socialism” is the opposite of “pollution.”

 

 

There's much, MUCH more here...

 

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2014/09/23/climate-movement-drops-mask-admits-communist-agenda/?singlepage=true

[DiveDeepSix]

Jeez my friend, you are as bad as Mule and Moose!!   

 

You can't go around posting common sense, patriotic American stuff like this with out making a couple Islam sympathizing, welfare loving, hate America and everything about it type people completely lose their minds!!!

 

You little pot stirrer you, keep up the good work!!!       

Edited September 25, 2014 by DiveDeepSix

[caz1104]

ughhhhhhhhhhhhhh....................people with agendas make me sic. I'm talking about the hidden agenda of the protesters

Edited September 25, 2014 by caz1104

[DiveDeepSix]

I feel your pain WHN!! 

     

Edited September 25, 2014 by DiveDeepSix

[gymrat76541]

So some communists, socialists, revolutionaries and progs set up at a Environment Rally and you think EVERYONE at that rally must be from their group huh?

 

I have been to the G A Y pride parade but that does NOT make me LGBT.

 

WOW The logic some people apply really makes me worry sometimes! LOL

[caz1104]

"not that there's anything wrong with it"

[Whatshername]

So some communists, socialists, revolutionaries and progs set up at a Environment Rally and you think EVERYONE at that rally must be from their group huh?

 

I have been to the G A Y pride parade but that does NOT make me LGBT.

 

WOW The logic some people apply really makes me worry sometimes! LOL

 

Gym, did you read the whole article?  LOGIC  would tell you that this is the predominate viewpoint.  Those not already on board the proletariat train were no doubt, being recruited.  People don't generally participate in rallies for things they disagree with (gaay pride parade, huh? Do tell! ).

[DiveDeepSix]

 

I have been to the G A Y pride parade but that does NOT make me LGBT.

 

Which one were you dude?         

 

Edited September 25, 2014 by DiveDeepSix

[DiveDeepSix]

[gymrat76541]

Gym, did you read the whole article?  LOGIC  would tell you that this is the predominate viewpoint.  Those not already on board the proletariat train were no doubt, being recruited.  People don't generally participate in rallies for things they disagree with (gaay pride parade, huh? Do tell! ).

 

If ya ain't tried it, don't knock it! I have friends who are LGBT but that does NOT mean that I approve or am LBGT.

Easy to sit back & judge folks - one day your judgement will be coming!

[zzztop]

Anything that starts with "people's" is communist.

[umbertino]

But a democracy ( esp. a great one) shouldn't at all be afraid of political diversity......

[Rayzur]

So we have an article author who has no theoretical understanding of the principles behind the words he's using, in turn referencing a collection of fringe political groups of people who likewise would not be able to collectively identify the theoretical principles defining the economic underpinnings  of either socialism or communism... and that is evidence that climate change has no interaction whatsoever with human participation? I just want to be clear about the tenants of his hypothesis, cause I sure as heck don't see the nexus.... .

 

and digressing for a moment to address that specific error: Apart from noting that both words have morphed into meaninglessness, traditionally,  Socialism and Communism are often used interchangeably  but they are actually two different economic principles. Socialism advocates ownership by the workers who use the capital and Communism advocates ownership of capital by the entire community. Socialism says that the distribution should take place according to the amount of an individual's production efforts, whilst communism asserts that that goods and services should be distributed among the populace according to individuals' needs. Socialism generally aims to have as many people as possible influence how the economy works, communism seeks to concentrate that number into a smaller amount. And overall while socialism generally refers to an economic system, communism refers to both an economic and political system. 

 

Whatever the confusion of the author and the protesting people as to the economic principles that guide them, I am fairly confident that the World Bank is crystal clear about the economic principles driving their business.

 

So if the author is by logical extension stating that the World Bank is a Socialist driven organization ruled by Communist governance... well that is not something I've ever heard even suggested, much less pondered.

 

That would also mean that all the scientists, and all world leaders grappling with this question (which is a different question actually) as it is directly impacting the economy of today, are likewise economically Socialists or [sic] Communist.

 

Hadn't pondered that possibility either......

 

 

If the question is framed as: Is climate change the result of natural cycles OR human impact?

it will absolutely keep people in some fantasy debate believing only ONE of the two things can be true.......  

 

When

• The climate is changing,
• Climate change has been happening in cycles on earth for as far back as we can measure
• Human impact effecting climate is a measurable event of impact.

 

Leading to the solution driven  questions:

Very roughly stated,

• Is human impact contributing to or exacerbating climate cycles
• Is human impact antagonizing the current climate cycle
  • (we are 4 maybe 4.5 C degrees away from a critical mass extinction path that we do not have the current ability to stop once it tips over that threshold)
• What if anything can we do to prevent or limit the probability of a critical mass threshold from happening 
  • Is modifying  human impact one of the variables that contribute toward limiting if not preventing this probability,

 

What is the need to close one's mind to asking and answering those questions? What is driving the fear ... or maybe anger with people that want these questions asked.... What is the source of anger over some of the answers emerging?

 

The only thing I can figure out is that somehow this issue has become extremely politicized ?? That's kind of how its looking to me.... Especially when people write long theoretically confused articles about fringe political groups  having a direct causal relationship driving peer reviewed hard scientific methodologically sound research questions....And frankly, the nexus between communism and the World Bank struggling with the economic impact of serious climate problems so as to  keep the global economy up and running, now and in the future is beyond logical comprehension.... 

 

Look,.... everyone has a choice, and I'm grateful there is enough maturity on DV to respect that we all have choice and those choices may be different... If this guy wants to use politics as the framework for solving a planetary dilemma with documented impact already evident..... Fine... Not my question, not my approach, and I don't think it will lead to much that is meaningful... but okay.... .

 

In the meantime, why in here is there such a huge force opposing that effort of questioning... I don't get it...Sharing what comes up as it does seems to bring a huge wave of opposition.....and I don't get why... What is being threatened in here?  If I'm wrong, great, I'm some dill weed that went down a rabbit hole..... And right now,  my rabbit hole is pretty full of hard science findings, and nee ner nee ner doesn't exactly reach the threshold of refuting quantifiable evidence... And if that evidence is wrong... then for heaven's sakes give me the metrics that refute it, give me the science... give me the numbers and stats..,, and stop withholding....

 

And please be clear, on a personal level, I love driving my Lincoln Navigator with its air conditioned seats as a commuter car..... I love the solitude and comfort of running little errands  in a 4 door Jag.... The lit-up quarter acre of running waterfalls in my backyard at the one house is peaceful.... Running 5 televisions all day long on both floors of the other house has always worked for me. And yeah, I'm likely among those defining conspicuous consumption, and my friends fill in any remaining gaps... There's way too much I really don't want  to give up and I would love sound scientific facts proving I responsibly don't have to.   Unfortunately, all the slogan driven platitudes, and one-liners tossed about don't do squat in actually addressing my commitment of responsibility to the well-being of my grandchildren's grandchildren. If someone can dig up peer reviewed science to refute the World Bank findings then for pete's sake post it and stop bringing paper clips to a gun fight. Please.. 

 

 

PS Apologies, as I often do, I started an answer hours ago, midst the up and down of doing 10 other things and hanging with a couple friends at various times .... before coming back a half day later and finishing it to post... As a result, I see there are a few answers to some of the questions I had, e.g., is this a politicized issue.... I see for many it is... Most unfortunate... though does explain some of the anger and fear..... Thanks... I really was wondering what the heck was going on... .

Edited September 26, 2014 by Rayzur

[DiveDeepSix]

IS THAT THE MASK WHERE THE ARCTIC WAS ICE FREE AT THE NORTH POLE A FEW YEARS BACK FOR THE FIRST TIME IN RECORDED HISTORY?

Speaking of those types of people here's one now.  No dude I think she was referring to the mask where you tree huggers got your ship stuck in the Antarctic ice that wasn't supposed to be there and needed 3 different ice breakers to get you idiots unstuck!!! Wake up little fella the climate has been warming up since the last ice age, otherwise my house would be under a glacier right now ......................... hmmmmm still pretty warm outside!!     

[10 YEARS LATER]

. . . and that my friends is how the cow fell out of the sky ! wowzers !

[Rayzur]

I've only glanced at some of the content... Interesting confused and equally insane, it appears that  communists and socialists somehow believe that their differing economic approach will somehow eliminate the very real issue of growing economies while reducing carbon emissions... what?? by virtue of being a communist or socialist??? Fossil fuel emission is reduced....because they have redistributed the wealth  among more people... Or is there some form of magical thinking that demand will decrease because communism or socialism is not a petrol-based economy like that of the rest of the entire planet???

As in the reply above, I'm having an equally hard time in this case understanding how changing who controls the wealth or wealth distribution will somehow change the fundamental underpinnings of that which drives the wealth of all industrial economies... (meaning all economies except maybe a jungle economy here and there).... 

 

Get over it people, even Russia abandoned those models in favor of a more capitalist approach. Focus people... this is not the place to parade your favorite pony... 

[Whatshername]

IS THAT THE MASK WHERE THE ARCTIC WAS ICE FREE AT THE NORTH POLE A FEW YEARS BACK FOR THE FIRST TIME IN RECORDED HISTORY?

No... but I would very much like a link to that BS!  (I'm gonna need satellite pics too!)  

The "MASK" referred to in this article is the one where, until recently, the commies have hidden their agenda to abolish Capitalism through the CANARD known as "climate change".  They aren't hiding anymore.  They want you to think Marxism is the answer.  And they're betting (and doubling down) that if they can get enough useful idiots and proles to buy into this, they can "change the world".  As with all communist theory (tried, tested and FAILED every time), totalitarianism is the end game.  Equal misery for all (except the ruling elites of course).  Can't you just taste the glorious tyranny, comrade?  

It has been said that there is no difference between communism and socialism, except the way of achieving the same ultimate goal: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism by voting. It's the same difference between murder and suicide. 

[Rayzur]

Speaking in general ..... regarding this issue as a whole....

I personally don't care what a bunch of communist or socialist people think. I don't care what a group of clowns, elected politicians, news casters, unicorns, or the grocery store clerk says.  I don't care how many pictures of receding ice or receding hairlines, or huge melting ice bergs films there are... And I least of all care about journalistic opinion about the social issues someone decided are linked to the whole issue.

 

If you have the degree of academic scientific expertise, practice and knowledge base qualifying you to be regarded as an expert.... thank G-d, that is beyond fabulous.... please, bring it on. Seriously, I WANT to see equally credible results showing a lack of probability …. showing a lack of relationship. That would be the happy moment of the year.

 

At the same time, it would be insanely naïve at best to believe anyone should dismiss hard science evidence based findings, simplistically based upon personal journalistic opinion absent any credibility to render such opinion, or actually showing credible findings of contrast....

 

If its a lie..... wonderful, great... fabulous... If you have the truth... stop with the naming it and show it. Its really that simple, unless of course there is some pathological whacko game of I know something you don't know and I'm not going to show you.... which is also fine... but if you're not going to show me then stop talking about it, and quit naming it truth...

 

Meanwhile, the world is marching on. I don't know what the people in NYC were protesting, If it was capitalism, that's stupid, Capitalism didn't cause it anymore than communism would save it... If it was to bring this to the attention of the world.... The world knows and as is often forgotten, includes more that the US and what the US is aware of as its defining point. However, even the US money, science and economic policy makers and investors are largely on board. On that level any debate in here is for sport as the actual issue has been resolved and the real world is moving forward.

 

If you want to debate, here is the information confronting you, and in which lies the evidence challenging you to credible in-kind debate. In actuality, the argument is not at all with what I think. Its with the volumes of  evidence in front of you that challenges the assertion that this is a lie, a joke, or an American political problem. Insulting the truths evident in these volumes of very real scientific findings by cherry picking straw dogs to take down …...serves no one and no thing.. least of all the people of this planet.

 

This link is to the UN University.... Its a starting place... If you can't find the actual link to the actual reports leading to the latest UN global leaders meeting, let me know and I'll search it out... Its not bookmarked on this computer and I'm over it right now... (BUT I will take the time to find it if you genuinely want it and can't find it)

 

Link to UNU climate change papers/research in general: http://collections.unu.edu/list/?cat=quick_filter&sort_by=searchKey0&search_keys[0]=climate+change

 

Link to UNU Climate Change program, its mission, overview, target audience, mission statement type stuff: http://unu.edu/research/climate-change.html#outline

 

Link to UNU home Page: http://unu.edu/

 

Peace out

[umbertino]

Interesting thread. Grazie

[DiveDeepSix]

I really don't understand what you are saying Rayzur, no offense, but your last posting I can't tell if you believe in global warming or you don't?  I don't.  Yes I do believe the planet is warming up because it has been since the last ice age.  If you look at historical records however, Britain had fruit trees (citrus by the way) at the time of the Roman Empire, there climate today is similar to what we have in MN and there are no citrus trees they can't handle the cold.  It goes on and on and on.  First the earth is warming, yet many places have broken all kinds of records (MN) for the coldest and longest winters recorded, so now .............. uuu hmmmm Climatologists   are saying it's cooling because it's warming?    Bottom line is they don't have a clue what is going on, I mean seriously?  Pick one.  There is as much evidence saying it's BS as there is saying it's true, as far as cherry picking facts that seems to be the data trend the so called climatologists are going with.  There was an article from, I can't remember exactly I'll try and find it, 70 to 100 years ago where scientist were saying in 10 years without a doubt because of global warming the whole planet would be under water and penguins would be extinct?    Guess what?

 

Now if you think humans are destroying this planet, I'd agree with that but also disagree.  In the scope of things how we as people see them, yes we are damaging every part of this planet, the earth, the air, the water certainly and we are making it uninhabitable for us as a species, yes, I'd say that is true.  In the bigger picture however this planet has been here for millions and millions of years, it has gone thru changes we as a species could never understand or survive.  Dinosaurs were here for millions of years and are now gone, it's our own self righteousness and naive feeling of superior importance over all other species since the dawn of the time that makes us some how feel we can destroy this planet, we can't.  Not with pollution, not with nukes, not by overpopulation.  All we can do is wipe ourselves out and take loads of species (which were not here millions of years ago either, proving the earth is constantly evolving) and yes that is probably where we are headed, but this planet will heal itself, evolve itself, destroy itself, and start over again and again and again with or with out mankind on it.

 

Anyway regardless of how we feel about global warming or lack there of, I think what WHN is pointing out is that a lot of these whackjob groups with or with out it are trying to use it as an excuse to push the world into communism/socialism. 

Edited September 26, 2014 by DiveDeepSix

[captl1]

There is no scientific proof only conjecture on the so called "Global Warming".. It has be disproved by as many if not more scientist than started this insane propaganda.  Go to Mexico City, Beijing take a deep breath and see who the real culprits are.. The same ones who support this! 

Edited September 26, 2014 by captl1

[DiveDeepSix]

Found it, I was wrong it was seals not penguins and it wasn't the whole planet just the coastal cities!!   

 

Here is some interesting info from the Washington Post on Global Warming, and yes it's been verified on Snopes, (Even though snopes is a liberal waste of time, I was actually surprised to see this verified there).

 

The Washington Post

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen , Norway 

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

 

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

 

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. 

Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.

* * * * * * * * *

I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - 90+ years ago!    

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/174267-global-warming-washington-post-roflmao/#ixzz3EQOE9NM0

Edited September 26, 2014 by DiveDeepSix

[Shabibilicious]

By all biblical time frames.........Dinosaurs are a myth.       At least that's what we argued about at bible study.......I don't attend that one anymore.    

 

GO RV, and NO BV

[Whatshername]

Ships don't get stuck in Antarctic ice. That is a land mass continent that is not crossed by ships. They get stuck in the Arctic. Which was my observation on my post - that it was ice free.

Ah, but they do get stuck in Antarctic ice (that shouldn't be there because the computer model said so).  Maybe you missed this story a while back (it could happen to anyone who likes their propaganda spoon-fed)... And since 97.5% of the MSM's reports chose to leave out this inconvenient little factoid... yeah, you probably just didn't see it, hear it, or laugh your ass off at it like we  "deniers" did... 

Frozen Out: 98% of Stories Ignore That Ice-bound Ship Was On Global Warming Mission

By Mike Ciandella | January 2, 2014 | 12:43 PM EST

A group of climate change scientists were rescued by helicopter Jan. 2, after being stranded in the ice since Christmas morning. But the majority of the broadcast networks’ reports about the ice-locked climate researchers never mentioned climate change.

The Russian ship, Akademic Shokalskiy, was stranded in the ice while on a climate change research expedition, yet nearly 98 percent of network news reports about the stranded researchers failed to mention their mission at all. Forty out of 41 stories (97.5 percent) on the network morning and evening news shows since Dec. 25 failed to mention climate change had anything to do with the expedition.

In fact, rather than point out the mission was to find evidence of climate change, the networks often referred to the stranded people as “passengers,” “trackers” and even “tourists,” without a word about climate change or global warming...

Haha... still funny!  

- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2014/01/02/frozen-out-98-stories-ignore-ice-bound-ship-was-global-warming-missi#sthash.TTUOcltR.dpuf

BTW... where's that link and satellite pics?  

[Shabibilicious]

Ah, but they do get stuck in Antarctic ice (that shouldn't be there because the computer model said so).  Maybe you missed this story a while back (it could happen to anyone who likes their propaganda spoon-fed)... And since 97.5% of the MSM's reports chose to leave out this inconvenient little factoid... yeah, you probably just didn't see it, hear it, or laugh your ass off at it like we  "deniers" did... 

Frozen Out: 98% of Stories Ignore That Ice-bound Ship Was On Global Warming Mission

By Mike Ciandella | January 2, 2014 | 12:43 PM EST

A group of climate change scientists were rescued by helicopter Jan. 2, after being stranded in the ice since Christmas morning. But the majority of the broadcast networks’ reports about the ice-locked climate researchers never mentioned climate change.

The Russian ship, Akademic Shokalskiy, was stranded in the ice while on a climate change research expedition, yet nearly 98 percent of network news reports about the stranded researchers failed to mention their mission at all. Forty out of 41 stories (97.5 percent) on the network morning and evening news shows since Dec. 25 failed to mention climate change had anything to do with the expedition.

In fact, rather than point out the mission was to find evidence of climate change, the networks often referred to the stranded people as “passengers,” “trackers” and even “tourists,” without a word about climate change or global warming...

Haha... still funny!  

- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2014/01/02/frozen-out-98-stories-ignore-ice-bound-ship-was-global-warming-missi#sthash.TTUOcltR.dpuf

BTW... where's that link and satellite pics?  

 

Do you honestly think the scientists went to Antarctica expecting the ice to be gone?    

 

GO RV, and NO BV