Here we are again, the ABC promoting what is  a very well disguised anti-Labor anti-green diarrhoea-ed diatribe from the ubiquitous and regularly resurgent Brendan O'Neill... 

"We do not preach a gospel of want and scarcity", said Sylvia Pankhurst of leftists. But now, that is precisely what leftists do - preach want, scarcity, the idea that natural limits demand that we shrink our eco-footprint, live more meekly, give up on the fight to bring about equity amongst human beings.

What an extraordinary sell out. How sad to see leftists doing the very thing that the left was initially founded to challenge - promoting a naturalistic apology for poverty and low horizons.

Some right-wingers argue that environmentalism is a clever cover for promoting Socialism, for sneaking left-wing values into power through the backdoor. It's no such thing. On the contrary, the rise of environmentalism on the left signals the end of centuries' worth of radical left-wing thought.

And today, a new generation of radicals who want to change the world for the better will have to challenge these left-wing greens and their naturalistic nonsense, just as surely and comprehensively as Marxists challenged Malthusians in the past.

This is the text of a monologue Brendan O'Neill delivered while guest-hosting Radio National's Counterpoint program.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4280782.html?WT.svl=theDrum

---------------------------------

Yes. A monologue is the spruik of someone talking to themselves and listening to their own voice while you are attached to a post and trying to understand the garbage... O'Neill should be hanged from the top of the mizzen mast — or at least keel-hauled... It's fine to have an opinion but this is not opinion it's pure devilish rubbish... The ABC is hitting new low by having him regularly as a "guest" speaker... Read more:

------------------------------

From Enlightenment humanists to Socialist thinkers, there emerged a really powerful belief that mankind was limited by his imagination and his social set-up rather than by Nature, alongside a conviction that we could satisfy everyone's needs and desires if we put our minds to it.

On the flip-side, it tended to be the conservative and backward-looking sections of society which promoted naturalistic thinking, which argued that there was a "natural order" and natural limits to mankind's aspirations. And it was these more conservative elements who said woe betide any mere mortal man who believes he can transgress these natural limits.

From anti-Enlightenment religious leaders to the Romantic reaction against the Industrial Revolution to the emergence of Malthusian groups in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries, it was those who were most hostile to humanist or left-wing thought who argued that Mother Nature was the ultimate determiner of human fortunes.

The Reverend Thomas Malthus was one of the first promoters of the overpopulation thesis. A man of the cloth and an infamous loather of proles, he wrote "An Essay on the Principle of Population" between 1798 and 1826. That essay claimed that there were only so many natural resources to go round and therefore if stupid, ugly poor people didn't stop having so many babies, there would be widespread famine and resource conflict. In essence, Malthus was one of the first-ever greens.

-------------------------------------

Sorry folks, I could peel all the layers here like the skin of an onion but I will only say this: we live in the 21st century and whatever those ancient dead people postulated is now old dead crap in the present context... These are old battles that were fought when science was still struggling to find itself — while at the same time trying to supplement the old erroneous ideas in which people did not not understand anything away from god...

To deny our part of nature and our role in it is to deny our humanity.

Whatever we do with it may be our choice, but nature to a great extend will react to what we do to it... Species will die, habitat will be lost, garbage will float on the oceans... I know, this fellow (Brendan) is trying to make us swallow that "global warming is shit" using devious means and by generously giving us his true "socialist" agenda that has more to do with masters and slavery of the Libs (conservatives) ilk... Brendan is a cunning right wing rat... His arguments cannot hold in the present context... A year or so ago he was warning us that the foolish Greenies were scouring the scientific data desperately to tell us the harsh winters in Europe were due to global warming... To which informed people told him he was peddling fallacies and he should follow the science closely. They were too kind...

Our social living cannot be disassociated from nature...  It would be madness (unfortunately, it has been our madness so far to use beliefs as a carrot, be we cannot afford this illusionary luxury anymore) not to accept we live like animals with a fantastic ability to modify our environment and to understand ourselves. But we have to be careful in doing so... Our improvements of social ventures do not need to destroy the environment. We can and should improve our social standings without crashing the place... 

Understanding global warming in this context is paramount despite the enormous challenges that this problem present to us... WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBAL WARMING. We have to find solutions to reduce its impact —on us and on the rest of nature. It would be stupid not to do so...