When Green Turns to Red

In 1991, after two democratic referendums, the country of Ukraine became an independent nation by seceding from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Five years earlier, in the city of Pripyat, in northern Ukraine, just 3 miles from the city of Chernobyl, one of the world’s most tragic nuclear accidents occurred. There was a full meltdown in one of the reactors which became known as the “Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster”.

The death toll from the disaster was expected to be well into the thousands, yet as late as 2005, the analysis showed that only 50 deaths could be directly attributed to the accident. Thyroid cancer became a significant health issue. There was a considerable escalation in psychological disorders with the relocation of 350,000 people from their nearby homes.

The only other extensive, large-scale nuclear accident has occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Ōkuma, Fukushima, Japan. This tragedy occurred in the year 2011 and was the result of the reactor location. A large portion of the country including Fukushima was devastated by the Tōhoku earthquake and an ensuing tsunami. The Chernobyl disaster was the result of exceedingly inferior environmental and safety standards in the communist USSR.

Anyone that is well-informed about the USSR’s central environmental and ecological policies during the nation’s existence from 1922 to 1991 understands that it was effectively nonexistent. It was this deficiency and failure that eventually and directly led to the union’s demise. This is covered in this linked article from the Odyssey magazine.

In one of the great ironies of our time, the final Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev founded Green Cross International, an environmental group headquartered in Geneva with satellite branches in 31 countries including, Global Green USA in Santa Monica, California, and Green Cross Canada in Ottawa, Ontario. He understood before many that deceptive actions and impersonating compassionate care for the world’s natural environment could lead to one-world order. I link an editorial he wrote in the New York Times in December of 2009.

Gorbachev’s quote, “The global economy must be reoriented toward the public good. It must emphasize issues like a sustainable environment, healthcare, education, culture, equal opportunities and social cohesion — including reducing the glaring gaps between wealth and poverty”, sounds exactly like the talking points of many progressive politicians.

Following in these exact footsteps and philosophies at the current time is Deutsche Bank Research (DBR). This firm is the economic analysis arm of the Deutsche Bank Group one of the world’s largest investment banks and financial services companies. On behalf of DBR, Eric Heyman, President of Olstein Capital Management, writes about the consequences for people and businesses as a result of the requirement to meet goals in achieving ‘climate neutrality’ by 2050.

Heyman declares that “eco-dictatorship” is an essential requirement of climate control where people’s behaviors must be abridged by exorbitant taxes and fees, as well as a significant tightening of regulatory laws.

For quite some time the theory of anthropogenic climate change has either been disproven totally or at maximum, invalidated as the disastrous monster advocated by alarmists, yet make-believe measures to combat it continue. Despite, mathematically and realistically showing that today’s renewable energies cannot sustain today’s power requirements, their expansion continues irrationally.

Thus, there has to be another reason for the constant clamor about climate change. With the use of the term “eco-dictatorship”, Heyman and Deutsche Bank make it abundantly clear what the motivation is.