excerpt from Mark Levin’s “Plunder & Deceit”
as read and commented on by Mark Levin Feb. 8, 2017
Degrowthers define their agenda as follows:
“Sustainable degrowth is a down-scaling of production and consumption that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions and equity on the planet.
It calls for a future where societies live within their ecological means, with open localized economies and resources more equally distributed through new forms of democratic institutions.”
It “is an essential economic strategy to pursue in overdeveloped countries like the United States -for the well-being of the planet, -of underdeveloped populations, and yes, even of the sick, stressed, and overweight ‘consumer’ population of the overdeveloped countries.”
For its proponents and adherents, degrowth has quickly developed into a pseudo-religion and public-policy obsession.
In fact, the degrowthers insist their ideology reaches far beyond the environment or even its odium for capitalism and is an all-encompassing lifestyle and governing philosophy.
Some of its leading advocates argue that:
“Degrowth is not just an economic concept. We shall show that it is a frame constituted by a large array of concerns, goals, strategies and actions. As a result, degrowth has now become a confluence point where streams of critical ideas and political action converge.”
Degrowth is “an interpretative frame for a social movement, understood as the mechanism through which actors engage in a collective action.”
The degrowthers seek to eliminate carbon sources of energy and redistribute wealth according to terms they consider equitable. They reject the traditional economic reality that acknowledges growth as improving living conditions generally but especially for the impoverished. They embrace the notions of “less competition, large scale redistribution, sharing and reduction of excessive incomes and wealth.”
Degrowthers want to engage in policies that will set “a maximum income, or maximum wealth, to weaken envy as a motor of consumerism, and opening borders (“no-border”) to reduce means to keep inequality between rich and poor countries.”
(You see there’s a reason why Obama and the Left want open borders. )
And they demand reparations by supporting a “concept of ecological debt, or the demand that the Global North pays for past and present colonial exploitation of the Global South.”
(This is sick! This is Marxism dressed up as environmentalism. On the radio for over a
decade I’ve said: “the Greens are the old Reds.” They’re the same Marxists.)
French economist and leading degrowther Serge Latouche asserts that
“We are currently witnessing the steady commercialization of everything in the world. Applied to every domain in this way, capitalism cannot help but destroy the planet much as it destroys society, since the very idea of the market depends on unlimited excess and domination.”
He also abhors economic growth and wealth creation, the very attributes necessary to improve the human condition and societies: “A society based on economic contraction cannot exist under capitalism.”
(So they want “economic contraction”, so did Obama, that’s why he was talking about blowing out electricity. [“rates would necessarily sky-rocket”])
Indeed, on July 18, 2014, scores of extreme groups throughout the world endorsed a proclamation titled the Margarita Declaration on Climate Change. (“changing The System, -not the climate”) which calls for, among other things, -an end to the “capitalist hegemonic system.”
Degrowth is “usually characterized by a strong utopian dimension.” Its foundations rely on a version of “economic relations based on sharing, gifts, and reciprocity, where social relations and conviviality are central.”
To implement this utopian vision of radical egalitarian outcomes, the degrowth movement employs strategies such as “alternative building, opposition and research, and in relation to capitalism, they can be ‘anti-capitalist’, ‘post capitalist’ and ‘despite capitalism.'”
The degrowthers insist that governments establish a living wage and reduce the workweek to twenty hours.
Apparently discounting the fact that the population of the globe has increased by several billion human beings in the intervening years, they call for bringing “material production back down to the levels of the 1960s and 1970s” and “return[ing] to small-scale farming.”
(Can you imagine what that would do? Doesn’t that sound Maoist to you? -the “Great Leap Forwar” that resulted in the deaths of millions and millions of people?)
And degrowthers “[d]ecree a moratorium on technological innovation, pending an in-depth assessment of its achievements and a reorientation of scientific and technical research according to new aspirations.”
Imagine the power and the breadth of the Police State necessary to enforce this form of antediluvian autocracy!
Over forty years ago, philosopher and author Ayn Rand, in her book “Return of the Primitive – The Anti-Industrial Revolution“, wrote presciently that the statists had changed their line of attack.
“Instead of their old promises the collectivism would create universal abundance and their denunciations of capitalism for creating poverty, they are now denouncing capitalism for creating abundance. Instead of promising comfort and security for everyone, they are now denouncing people for being comfortable and secure.”(!!)
She continued: “The demand to ‘restrict’ technology is the demand to restrict man’s mind. It is nature –i.e., reality – that makes both of these goals impossible to achieve.
Technology can be destroyed, and the mind can be paralyzed, but neither can be restricted. Whether and wherever such restrictions are attempted, it is the mind, —not the State — that withers away.”
“To restrict technology would require omniscience –a total knowledge of all the possible effect and consequences of a given development for all the potential innovators of the future. Short of such omniscience, restrictions mean the attempt to regulate the unknown, to limit the unborn, to set rules for the undiscovered.”
“A stagnant technology is the equivalent of a stagnant mind. A ‘restricted’ technology is the equivalent of a censored mind.”