The true nature of the anti-human “green” movement

19 08 2010

This article, “Felled by an invidious green plot“, exposes the true nature and philosophy of your typical greenie.  A belief that humans are dirty sinning polluters and a belief in the higher power of Gaia (or the inanimate planet Earth) make for a dangerous, anti-human worldview. 

The injustice inflicted on John Gay is appalling in the so-called “free” country of Australia.  Greenies continue to get away with initiating force against the truly virtuous and productive people of this world. 

This is the chilling story of how green activists targeted and finally brought down John Gay, the visionary former chairman of the Tasmanian timber company Gunns, damaged the company and helped wreck the state economy.

In Gay’s downfall is everything you need to know about the conscience-less dishonesty of the green movement, and how its war on progress is camouflaged as concern for nature.

In John Gay’s words:

“I had to leave Gunns because the institutional investors were targeted by the greens and kept pressuring me to resign, and I just wasn’t prepared to put my wife and two kids through any more [of the] thuggery in the green movement. They’ve damaged Tasmania and did their best to damage my credibility.”

The article continues:

Then there was the personal vilification. Gay describes it as ”torture” for his wife, Erica, and adult son and daughter, with his home under assault two or three nights a week for years – from smoke bombs under the house, stink bombs at the front door, dead possums in the yard, people rattling the gates late at night and screaming abuse from the street.

His wife was spat at in the supermarket and the Tasmanian media sat on the fence as a good man’s reputation was destroyed.

”My wife and kids were tormented . . . I had to put in a security system so my wife could feel safe,” he says.

 And incidentally, if you want evidence that pragmatist epistemology dominates in our society, read the comments to this article.  The argument repeated ad nauseam is that the author’s opinion isn’t “balanced”, or is “one-sided”.  Forget objective reality.  These commentors are so intellectually stunted they seem to believe that if an opinion is principled and doesn’t find the popular middle ground it’s therefore wrong! 

Yesterday a greeny acquaintance of mine rejected my views on open immigration because I had a “radical extreme capitalist” position.  This was literally his only comeback!  And he presumably believed this “argument” was actually worth wasting my time with!  This poor soul simply cannot think in principle.  And his pragmatism ensures he cannot argue intelligently.  It’s really quite sad to witness.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: