The climate debate sits between the two extremes of, say, feral Greta Thunberg, and the big-winded ‘deniers’ who all work for Sky and News Corp. But what about the unpretentious middle ground?
Fear not, dear readers, NAB isn’t coming out on the side of Extinction Rebellion, we’re just here to offer our opinion and frank assessment of what is needed. See, we are not entirely convinced of global warming but we are in no doubt about global pollution wreaking distress on the elements which give life.
It would be an insincere patriot who fell on the side of arguing in defence of the coal miners and companies, mostly foreign-owned, keen to convince us that coal is so clean you could inject it into a cigarette and smoke it unfiltered.
Likewise, we know that to shut down the coal industry without hesitation would lead to hardship unknown since cover wagon times. Old age pensioners, the young and useless would alternately freeze and bake to death, we would no longer be able to store our food, see our way in the dark, or boil of a mug of coffee without turning native and lighting a fire in a makeshift hearth on the kitchen floor.
Frankly, we would probably be the most violent assailants against climate activists, partly because we hate them for a broad range of reasons, but mainly because we know most of them are Trotskyites anyway.
And vegans, we’d love to feed them to the lions, in an act rich in irony. Vegans should be kept on leashes and kicked when they soil themselves. In fact, leashes are too good for them, they should be housed like rabbits in warrens and left to graze on the grass in the back lawn. A vegan should neither be seen nor heard, only punched and kicked.
We guess we’re trying to say that a vegan must inevitably be an environmental activist and as such an avowed pain in the blueberries.
In an eco-nationalist world, we would strive for much that is sustainable and undamaging to the environment. We would do this because we are true patriots loathe to turn our own soil into a rank toxic sludge for the sake of a new car in the driveway and a swimming pool.
Private wealth is a very poor reason to kill the planet and it’s a fool or a liar who argues the wealth benefits of maintaining destructive practises for fear of change. It’s bizarre to watch the militant leftist union the CFMEU, which provides a meeting area for subversive leftist groups, dithering between two polar opposite attitudes to earth-wrecking Indian mining monster Adani.
The gist of their games, which has ended up with them unfathomably supporting the proven environment poisoner, is they want assurance of keeping jobs “local, permanent and secure”. This is an indication of how dense your average CFMEU lumpen is. The Adani board would be laughing themselves shitty as they high-fived one another and stopped rolling around on the floor long enough to pull on a straight face and make every sincere assurance that no outside labour would be brought in to run their water-wasting, resource-contaminating operation.
Likewise, it was just as intriguing that Qld’s Labor government has resisted Adani so much, which either means they don’t pay that well, or a communist Chinese company has been lobbying for the same ground.
Environmental pollution is something which nobody can argue against. China’s air provides all the evidence one needs of what unfettered industrialisation creates of the atmosphere. It is another reason they will seek to acquire, in their barely disguised imperialist push, to seize living space from around Asia and beyond and particularly our own. They already have Zimbabwe mostly under Chinese occupational control and more indebted nations which default will soon become Chinese outposts on their ‘One Belt, One Road’.
We do not come to this opinion piece with a detailed report of what should otherwise be done, because this is a conversational tone. What we can say is that apart from the obvious immediate relief to problems we’re now facing such as critical water shortages a complete stop to immigration is the only solution.
Likewise, any sane and rational person not caught betwixt the stultifying incongruities and contradictions of Trotskyist slogans and thought should see that by returning vast swathes of unneeded capitalist labour back to where they belong the need to punish the environment in the interim until longer-term solutions can be found is the only reasonable (and desirable) course of action. Not only will it serve the environment but it will benefit the nation in a myriad of ways.
Once we’ve cleared up the population to a homogenous and sustainable level, we can start to consider ways to end the kind of waste that is currently exported to places like Malaysia, such as ‘recyclable plastics.’ Moving the problem to another place only means once the wheel has turned it inevitably comes back to us.
There is nothing at all wrong with conceiving of alternatives to technologies which might, despite the scoffers, provide a new manufacturing base which Australia could just as easily export. Given the enormous environmental resources of Australia we are in the best position and most urgent to start conceiving of those for ourselves. We can’t say readily what they might be, other than renewable energy sources, but an eco-nationalist thinktank dedicated solely to this problem could save our marine life, our oceans, our farmland, our air and drinking water. The problems of waste management et al could be better sorted.
Eco nationalism is not just a passing idea, it’s imperative, if nationalism is to prove sincere and dedicated to the soil and not simply the blood.