- Text smaller
- Text bigger
More than 20 years ago, when I was a freshman in college, I met some
people who were involved in something called “The Alliance for
Survival.” They were anti-nuclear activists. They loved whales, trees,
endangered species of all kinds and little fishies. They opposed nuclear
power because it was bad for the environment and for the future of the
Little did I realize that the organizers and leaders of this group
were leftist radicals who hated the U.S. military and the free market.
Their real goal was the nuclear disarmament of the United States. I
didn’t discover this until a friend took me to one of their marches,
which included a candle-light vigil. The speeches that I heard at the
event did not evidence much love and concern for the environment, but
were instead filled with a burning hatred of the United States, the U.S.
armed forces and the capitalist system.
The Alliance for Survival was not merely an environmentalist group.
It was one of those false fronts in which environmental concerns were
hijacked and used to fuel a socialist revolution. Direct experience with
those people opened my eyes, and for the first time I saw how causes
could be manipulated and exploited by people with a hidden agenda.
This was my first lesson in environmental politics. More recently I
was invited to a dinner party at the house of a leading Green Party
official here in California. (Believe it or not, the Green Party has
successfully gotten one of their numbers elected mayor in the north
coastal town of Arcata and another elected to the California State
Assembly.) The Greens are nice enough people, civic minded and generous,
but it turns out they are mostly socialists of one stripe or another —
though none of them care for the Marxist label.
One of the leading Green Party organizers I met was kind enough to
give me a basic history lesson on the environmental movement. Just as my
eyes were about to glaze over, he said that he owed everything to his
grandparents. They had been his political teachers.
“Were they Green Party activists?” I asked.
Suddenly he looked as though he’d bitten down on something
unpleasant. “They were Communists,” he confessed.
In fact, they were members of the Communist Party USA. And yes, they
had taught him how to think about politics — how to distrust
capitalism, big business, and the Pentagon. Of course, he was not a
Communist himself. Instead, he exemplified the watermelon: green on the
outside, red on the inside.
It should be said that concern for the environment is not to be
equated with socialism or Marxism. That’s not the message I want to
convey. But a dirty hijacking job has taken place. Socialists have
inserted themselves into a decent cause — a valid set of concerns —
and by a combination of
exaggeration and imposition they have succeeded in finding a back door
for inserting elements of their revolutionary agenda into national
The greatest and most sinister example can be found in the politics
of “global warming.” It has been shown that modern industrialization has
led to an increase in the production of greenhouse gases within the
earth’s atmosphere. This, in turn, is supposedly heating up the planet
and melting the polar icecaps. If this process is allowed to continue
there will be a catastrophe.
Because of my familiarity with the environmentalist camp, I never
treated global warming seriously. But I was recently surprised to hear
an intelligent conservative assure me that global warming had been
scientifically proved. This took me by surprise, so I did some checking.
According to Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, a top professor of meteorology
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and an advisor to
the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
“Satellite measurements over the last 30 years show no sign of [global]
In other words, there is little scientific evidence that the planet
is getting warmer. The many studies you read about in the newspapers are
inconclusive. Check for yourself and read the fine print. The wild
assertions of the environmental alarmists cannot to be trusted, even if
some of these alarmists have managed to acquire scientific credentials.
According to Prof. Lindzen, the climate fluctuations of recent years are
within the normal range. To cite just one example, recent studies on the
melting of the icecaps are based on very questionable assumptions.
Then what about the so-called scientific models which show a definite
increase in global temperatures over the next 50 years? According to
Lindzen, these future projections are based on unproven
computer-generated models. While it is true that there has been a 25
percent increase in carbon dioxide within the earth’s atmosphere since
1850, the idea that this results in global warming is itself a theory
which has yet to be proved.
Prof. Lindzen tells us that we don’t really understand how the
atmosphere works. He also points out that most important greenhouse gas
is — believe it or not — water vapor. As for the existence of a
scientific consensus on global warming, most meteorologists and climate
scientists remain unconvinced by the evidence so far presented on global
So why do most people believe the earth is getting hotter? How could
a well-informed conservative come to assume that global warming is
scientific fact when most climate experts simply don’t believe in it?
Global warming is one of socialism’s Trojan horses. Like the Trojan
Horse of Greek legend, it is meant to catch us off guard. According to
the ancient story, the Greeks built a giant hollow horse and hid
soldiers inside of it. The Trojans thought it a gift and wheeled it
inside the city. When
the city was asleep the Greek soldiers emerged and attacked the
defenders from inside.
The socialists are experts in the construction of Trojan horses — in
social policy, military affairs, diplomacy, sociology, history and
education. In terms of environmental policy, what they are aiming at is
a climate treaty in which the United States and other middle class
countries are stripped of their wealth because of their carbon dioxide
emissions. Socialism, in theory, wants to smash capitalism. How can this
be accomplished? Find a way to rob the rich countries and give to the
poor ones. Global warming facilitates this plan.
In reality the transfer of wealth from rich nations to poor will
destroy the successful economies of the middle class countries, while
encouraging stagnation and corruption in the “emerging” economies of the
poor nations. The whole world would suffer ruination by this scheme. The
equality thus achieved would be an equality of shared misery. Global
indeed suffer a severe defeat.
Prof. Lindzen is not afraid to tell the truth about this. As an
advisor to the United Nations on climate change he has publicly stated
that the world’s leaders know there is “little scientific justification
for a climate treaty.” In fact, they aren’t interested in discussing the
science of global warming, because such a discussion goes against their
political program. “This is all politics,” says Lindzen. “It really has
little to do with climate or global warming.”
We need to be skeptical today. We need to realize that many of the
media images and messages we receive have been generated by our enemies.
As is a rule of thumb, whenever a new “truth” appears, if that “truth”
is then used to justify the wholesale plundering of our country and the
transfer of our
wealth to foreigners, then you can be sure that this so-called “truth”
is nothing more than an attack by enemies, malcontents and
The question we ought to ask, in this context, is why we have allowed
the nation’s enemies, malcontents and revolutionaries to get so far with
their crazy schemes?