Nowhere is the corruption of language more apparent than within the environmental movement. A movement that is intent on controlling every aspect of life disguises its thirst for power with words that appear to be scientific and reasonable. But when the language of the environmental left is examined, it turns out to be a fraud.
Large-scale central planning, even of the most ruthless sort, has always been the left’s preferred mode of operation. Within the Obama administration, this planning has focused on achieving what the left calls “sustainability.” Like so many core values of the left, sustainability can be made to mean whatever one wishes it to mean. But apart from its meaning, one thing that is always involved in sustainable policymaking is a dominant role for government.
In line with the environmental lobby, the Obama administration has the odd notion that sustainability can be brought about by restricting consumption alone. …. There is no limit to how far the left will go in stripping us of our liberties and reducing us to Gandhian poverty.
The ultimate frontier, or “solution,” is to legislate the removal of human beings from part or all of the earth’s surface. More than a few environmentalist leaders, including our current national science and technology advisor John Holdren, have advocated the reduction of human population to what they consider a “sustainable” level.
Central to the left’s fraudulent lexicon is that word “sustainability.”
As it is currently used, “sustainability” applies only to solar, wind, and geothermal sources of energy. Yet, in reality, none of these sources are sustainable — they are not even viable.
Ironically, the least sustainable sources of power are those championed by the environmental movement.
Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere: