Communism in Green Clothing

Probably the most blatantly communist article I have read yet from the fanatic environmentalist movement, Christer Sanne writes a short essay in DN regarding how we apparently don’t need economic growth anymore. This is, to put it bluntly, the most outrageously unintelligent comment made in this newspaper in the past several years.

We desperately need growth in order to fund better research, better medicines, better roads, better transportation, better schools, better universities, more police presence in troubled neighborhoods, more support for victims of crime, more jobs, a better environment, and a thousand other reasons. Where, exactly, does Mr. Sanne believe that we will get the resources from? Even more amusingly, perhaps, is that Sanne is too stupid to understand what “growth” actually is. Growth is the accumulation of value. And value is the fruit of man’s reason and work.

What Sanne is saying, then, is that we should stop increasing our knowledge, stop advancing our technology, stop creating new jobs and new companies, stop using our mental faculties. He wants us to reduce and diminish that which we have already accomplished.

With dangerous, ideological nihilists such as Sanne in charge, humanity would be on the fast road to another Dark Age of suffering, superstition, and persecution of the productive.


~ by Escaping Perdition on October 15, 2009.

4 Responses to “Communism in Green Clothing”

  1. I think you’ve misunderstood Sannes message. We don’t need to consume more to be able to improve the way we live. We can research without more money. We can build better schools with the current rate of resources.

    This planet can’t give more and more resources just because someone has more money. Money is nothing, just something invented by humans to control others.

    Here are a good explanation of money:

    • “So you think that money is the root of all evil? Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?”

  2. Where do you believe we will get the foundation for more growth from? The resources are limited and are running out, there is a limit in time and energy as to how much people can work so finally we have capital. Do you think a growth based upon capital is sustainable in the long run? Didn’t just the financial crisis show the problems?

    It is fundamental economics that Growth = resources + work + capital.
    Therein you can also read that the more growth we achieve, the closer to the limit we will get. And when our economy takes growth for granted doped with loans on both state and individual level, then we are in big trouble. We must get out of a system that ignores the frames and limits in which our economy operates. Growth in itself is not bad but the ways in which we achieve growth today are not sustainable and won’t help us in the long run as they are built on a too weak foundation.

    And please drop the communism bullshit. Communism is an idea as is capitalism. To use them just shows lack of proper arguments.

    • “It is fundamental economics that Growth = resources + work + capital”
      If this were the case, the Soviet Union would have been a fabulous, fantastic success story. Plenty of resources, plenty of work hours, and plenty of capital investments. As everyone knows, that particular experiment in government-planned economics failed spectacularly. However, what is missing from your equation is the individual’s drive to achieve, create, and invent. Free minds and free markets create wealth and opportunities and a higher standard of living. Quite funny that, considering how many environmentalists are more focused on dying, stating how much better the “planet” would be off if there were billions less of us.

      Instead of trying to find government-regulated solutions to the problems of today, we should allow our inventors, scientists, entrepreneurs and businessmen the freedom to explore new solutions to all our problems. And as for your “bullshit” comment, I suggest you calm down if you want to continue to be allowed to publish here. Regarding capitalism and socialism, there are really only two directions to go in regards to solving our environmental problems:
      Option one is more individual economic freedom to pursue technological solutions using our free minds.
      Option two is more government control, more government taxation, more government regulation; to control minds.

      You can of course choose to label these options with whatever names suit you, but the fact remains that one leads down the slippery slope to totalitarianism. That’s why it saddens me to see the state of the modern environmentalist movement. We really must work hard to get a better environment, but instead of focusing on that, so many “greens” are simply socialists with a fresh coating of green paint, begging for more government, more control, more collectivism.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s