← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Mr.Wilson
Thread ID: 4306 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2003-01-04
2003-01-04 02:02 | User Profile
This website humorously points out how the "infiltrated" Sierra Club will not raise the issue of uncontrolled immigration as being the primary cause of urban sprawl and the destruction of the environment.Be sure to "Meet Our Pope" and see the "New Arrivals". [url=http://www.sierraclubbed.com/]http://www.sierraclubbed.com/[/url]
2003-01-05 01:58 | User Profile
I learned everything I needed to know about the Sierra Club several years ago when this controversy broke:
When Sierra Club members recently voted down a resolution calling for greatly restricting legal immigration levels, the organization's leadership and many of its allies were elated. Club president [u]Adam Werbach[/u] had threatened to resign if the measure passed. "I was terrified," he said.
[url=http://reason.com/opeds/vp050598.shtml]http://reason.com/opeds/vp050598.shtml[/url]
[u]Adam Werbach[/u], a member of the Green [u]Zionist[/u] Alliance slate,
[url=http://jewishtribalreview.org/iszi2.htm]http://jewishtribalreview.org/iszi2.htm[/url]
2003-01-05 02:26 | User Profile
Recluse,
Thanks for the link.
When the resolution calling for greatly restricting legal immigration level came up, I recall one the "Hispanic"-"American" Sierra Club member said he was "Mexican" first before he an environmentalist. And said it was "Racist."
2003-01-05 17:39 | User Profile
When Sierra Club members recently voted down a resolution calling for greatly restricting legal immigration levels, the organization's leadership and many of its allies were elated. Club president Adam Werbach had threatened to resign if the measure passed. "I was terrified," he said
Ya know, it never ceases to amaze me (after reading CofC, of course) how monolithic in purpose these folks are. You'd think, if not simply for the sake of appearances, at least some Jews would be against immigration, no? Particularly those who purportedly care about the environment? I know MacDonald considers this unanimity of opinion and focus a "group evolutionary strategy" but it seems to also suggest a more consciously crafted conspiracy. Perhaps being a highly individualistic European-derived person makes it impossible for me to understand the groupthink of these Middle-Eastern tribesmen, perhaps they do simply do what they do out of some natural survival instinct.
What bothers me the most about it is that I can no longer read anything without having to ask who the person is that wrote it and what is their underlying agenda? For example, I was a big fan of SJ Gould's essays in Natural History Magazine when I was a teenager, but in retrospect it is easy to see that everyone of them is infused with the standard Tribal Party Line. Why would so many intelligent people be unable to extract themselves from the genetic/cultural matrix of Judaism and take points of view that were objective/rational rather than mere propaganda pieces?
Whatever the reason is, I think it is the sheer lack of guile on the lack of the Goyim that allows us to be bamboozled the way we have. I see what is being done, and still can't believe it!
2003-01-05 18:54 | User Profile
Maximillian,
**You know why they call environmentalist watermelons? Green on the outside Red on the inside! **
They will always sell out the "earth" when in gets in the way of the growth of Marxism!
2003-01-05 22:29 | User Profile
Originally posted by Maximillian@Jan 5 2003, 17:39 **Ya know, it never ceases to amaze me (after reading CofC, of course) how monolithic in purpose these folks are. ÃÂ You'd think, if not simply for the sake of appearances, at least some Jews would be against immigration, no? Particularly those who purportedly care about the environment? I know MacDonald considers this unanimity of opinion and focus a "group evolutionary strategy" but it seems to also suggest a more consciously crafted conspiracy. ÃÂ Perhaps being a highly individualistic European-derived person makes it impossible for me to understand the groupthink of these Middle-Eastern tribesmen, perhaps they do simply do what they do out of some natural survival instinct.
**
Firstly, there are a few Jews against immigration, as you suggest. Dan Stein of FAIR and the head of America Patrol come to mind, as we've discussed before here.
The split between the elite and grassroots of the Sierra Club isn't too surprising, considering that the elite tends to be dominated by academic environmental theory. Academic environmental theory is formulated upon the principles of Postmodernsm, that Frankfurt School derived train of thought so dominated today at the top by the Frankfurt School type thinking of deconstructionist Jews like Jaques Derrida.
2003-01-06 02:57 | User Profile
Originally posted by AntiYuppie@Jan 5 2003, 22:58 **In contrast, Marxists in their worship of the modern (and ultimately the postmodern) regarded nostalgia for farmland and wilderness as reactionary antiquarianism and thus combatted and ridiculed such tendencies as "counter-revolutionary." It was only in 1960's America that New Left radicals realized that environmental degradation would be a great stick to beat "dead white males" with (in spite of the fact that efficient western industries cause far less pollution than Third World and Communist regimes, and the fact that the US and Western Europe set aside protecte wilderness lands long before any Third World Nation even contemplated the idea)......
The fact that the environmentalist left is lead by urban, cosmopolitan, Jewish or Judaized gentiles who feel more at home in concrete and asphalt wastelands than in the rural (or wild) country should set off some immediate alarm bells as to what their true agenda is. Why would people who never set foot in a swamp or a forest be so concerned about "saving" them? The obvious answer is that they are not, but are merely using these seemingly legitimate causes to advance their anti-occidental worldviews.**
You're quite right about environmentalism being foreign to old Marxism, and product of the New Left. The New Left of course, with all its corrolary's, feminism, homophilia, (actually pervophilia in general, from Marcuse's" polymorphous perversity") was the product of Trotskyitism, the Frankfurt School, and the Frankfurt School's derivitive which controls the modern world, postmodernism.
Environmentalism is quite interesting, in that you can see the "critique of modernity" so characteristic in the writings of Frankfurt Schooler's such as T.W. Adorno, and the shift in the left from one relying on "Eastern" Marxism to "Western" (cultural) Marxism.
2003-01-06 03:09 | User Profile
AntiYuppie,
Great Post. The history of Marxism is often very odd. I think they have been working on getting into anti-modernist movement from the start. They have even worked with Royalist at times even. I was shocked when I found out that William Morris was a Marxist. Marxist have worked hijack many a movement. The S.H.A.R.P. skinheads are case in point and poof they can pervert anything. In 1960's they did what they could with the hippies. Perverting over movement to way of Marxism.
How Marxists managed to hijack the environmental movement is a study in opportunism and hypocrisy. Conservationist thought in the West has its origins with anti-modernist rightwing thinkers nostalgic for a pre-industrial world. Examples include John Ruskin in England, Ludwig Jahn and Oswald Spengler in Germany, and Konrad Lorenz in Austria. This heritage of anti-modernist, "reactionary" environmentalism continues to influence European rightist thought to some extent, i.e. Joerg Haider incorporated conservationist ideas into his party platform.
In contrast, Marxists in their worship of the modern (and ultimately the postmodern) regarded nostalgia for farmland and wilderness as reactionary antiquarianism and thus combatted and ridiculed such tendencies as "counter-revolutionary." It was only in 1960's America that New Left radicals realized that environmental degradation would be a great stick to beat "dead white males" with (in spite of the fact that efficient western industries cause far less pollution than Third World and Communist regimes, and the fact that the US and Western Europe set aside protecte wilderness lands long before any Third World Nation even contemplated the idea).
One can see the great damage done to environment in Eastern Europe by the Soviets.