Green in Tooth and Claw: The Misanthropic Mission of Climate Alarm

By Niall McCrae

Through relentless propaganda, cataclysmic climate change is indoctrinated into society. But the real threat to humanity is the powerful people who are pushing this message. UN Agenda 21, executed by the World Economic Forum's 'Great Reset', is building a global technocracy. Total control of population and resources is the end, the means justifi

• Language: English
• Publisher: The Bruges Group
• Release date: Jan 21, 2024
• ISBN: 9781739315290

Niall McCrae

Niall McCrae PhD, MSc, RMN is a senior lecturer in mental health at King's College London. His previous books were The Moon and Madness (2011) and Echoes from the Corridors: the Story of Nursing in British Mental Hospitals (with Peter Nolan, 2016). Niall writes regularly for Salisbury Review magazine and various socio-political websites, and he campaigns for freedom of speech in universities.

Book preview

Introduction

A tale of two rallies. On 22nd April 2023, the climate change activist group Extinction Rebellion held a widely publicised week of action in London, culminating in a large gathering at Parliament Square. I was nearby on Whitehall, speaking at a small demonstration against UK involvement in the war in Ukraine. The hundreds of green followers who passed by were predominantly white and middle-class, as at a pro-EU rally (or a queue at an upmarket Waitrose supermarket). Numerous children accompanied their virtuous parents. There was plenty of colour: painted faces and slogans daubed on eccentric clothing. The mood, despite the prophecies of doom, was of a fancy-dress jamboree.

I asked several of the bien pensants whether they had their priorities right: they showed no interest in our protest against war, instead concerning themselves with a putative one-degree rise in temperature allegedly caused by carbon dioxide. Answers to ‘Where is the climate crisis?’ were vague and cliché. ‘It’s happening now’ was a typically unconvincing response amid the cool and cloudy spring weather. They looked askance when asked why Extinction Rebellion has said nothing about the tons of methane released from the alleged US sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline (perhaps for fanatics against fossil fuels, this was a price worth paying).

A more serious and organised element had banners and t-shirts with the campaign logo of Population Matters. None of these adherents to modern eugenics were prepared to state an optimal population for the UK, though. That would risk touching on the taboo topic of mass immigration, a phenomenon not only escaping criticism from green activists but cheered on – an apparent cognitive dissonance that I shall discuss further in this book.

Then came the coup de grâce. A carefully choreographed unit of red-cloaked figures glided silently along Whitehall. Apparently, this macabre march signifies humanity bleeding to death. Shouts of ‘Satanists’ from my side drew no response from the androgynous, lifeless faces of this Doomsday cult. Everything that Extinction Rebellion and its offshoots do seeks – and gets – mainstream media attention.

Two months earlier, I went to a rally in Oxford, which received limited coverage in mainstream media. Thames Valley Police estimated two thousand, but the true number was much larger. The event was in response to Oxford City Council’s low-traffic neighbourhood scheme, which will divide the small city into sectors, with restrictions and charges applied to residents driving into another sector.¹. Agenda 2030 is being rolled out in Oxford, and protestors came from across the country, knowing that this regime would be coming to their town too.

The Oxford LTN is an acceleration of the incremental work of local authorities in recent years. Already many residential streets had been blocked from main roads with gates or bollards. Such restrictions are undoubtedly beneficial in reducing traffic, but they also make journeys more awkward for people living in the neighbourhood. Some councils have installed cameras near schools, fining drivers who unwittingly drive past at the wrong time. Schemes similar to that of Oxford, sold on the marketing myth of ‘15-minute cities’ (where everything you need is with a short walk or bicycle ride), were announced by Bath, Canterbury and Edinburgh, and suddenly every local authority is getting in on the act.

Many protestors were continuing the march that began against the Covid-19 regime. They have joined the dots on a broader plan to control the global population. This is not a wild conspiracy theory: Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum wrote a book soon into the purported pandemic titled Covid-19: the Great Reset, enthusing on the opportunities of lockdown and other coercive public health interventions as a ‘narrow window of opportunity’ to radically change society.² Political leaders around the world spouted the same mantra to ‘build back better’. Nobody voted for this.

Seemingly a cartel of corporations, bankers and non-governmental organisations aided by progressive political leaders (the Davos set) is now running the world. They care not for the ordinary people but for their elevation to an elite-run technocracy. The contrived climate crisis is the means by which citizens are held in a tightening ratchet of supposedly ecological policies. Whoever is pulling the strings eludes identification, although it is always advisable to follow the money: the investment bankers of BlackRock and Vanguard are sure to be at the commanding heights.

Schoolchildren are bludgeoned into believing that humankind is a stain on our planet. The purpose of climate scaremongering, however, is not making the world greener and more sustainable but for globalists to take total control of population and resources. Think about it. If 15-minute cities were really for residents’ benefit, why are the first provisions not new amenities but surveillance cameras and roadblocks? If our leaders were genuinely concerned about plastic pollution, they would have been more concerned about the billions of facemasks, testing kits and syringes produced for Covid-19. And there would not be paper straws in a plastic sheath.

This is not a scientific treatise. No graphs or tables of statistical data are reproduced. There are plenty of meteorological rebuttals of climate change missives, such as Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.³George Monbiot’s Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning⁴, or Greta Thunberg’s No One is Too Small to Make a Difference⁵. Instead, this book is primarily a cultural analysis, looking beyond whether there is an ecological crisis as to why it is being used to transform human existence. What is the motive, and for whose benefit?

We shall explore the social and ideological forces that have led humanity along a path of nihilism, the Marxist and fascist roots of the climate change agenda, the cult of Net Zero, and the exploitation and expropriation of our worldly goods by the omnipotent technocratic cabal. While this book may preach to the already-converted, I hope it reaches beyond sceptical circles to awaken others to the dystopian designs for our future. Putting it simply, it’s a choice between freedom and enslavement.

Notes

1.   McCrae N (March 2023): Councils should prioritise the people, not Net Zero. The Light.

2.   Schwab K, Malleret T (2020): Covid-19: the Great Reset. World Economic Forum.

3.   Gore A (2006): An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It. Bloomsbury.

4.   Monbiot G (2007): Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning. South End.

5.   Thunberg G (2019): No One is Too Small to Make a Difference. Penguin.

CHAPTER 1

Green fingers bleed

Ecofascism, like national socialism and international communism, began in Germany. Ashamed of compatriots falling for the blood-and-soil ideology of the recent past, the fledgling German Green Party was cautious of using symbols, Adolf Hitler having espoused mystical Aryan harmony with nature. However, Die Grúnen left the door open to radical leftists, who were regarded as morally sound if not quite ecologically tuned. Socialist economics had failed miserably in Europe, and as the large parties of the Left shifted towards the centre, some Marxists saw the green movement as a platform. Indeed, the Greens advanced in the 1980s because of (rather than despite) hard-left infiltration, and that is key to understanding how environmentalism started and how it’s going.

As told by Berkeley scholars Charlene Spretnak and Fritjof Capra in Green Politics: the Global Promise (1984)¹, the twenty-seven representatives of the Green Party taking their seats in the Bundestag on 22 March 1983 were a mix of conservative environmentalists, New Age healers and Marxists of varying shades. This was an electoral triumph, but would it be fleeting? A broad church cannot endure without compromises. Under Marxist influence, conservatism (inherently protective of the environment) was deemed guilty by association with capitalism, which was regarded as the cause of all society’s ills and an obstacle to a green utopia.

The Green Party’s federal programme for West Germany had four pillars: ecology, social responsibility, grassroots democracy and nonviolence. Let us consider each of these as a baseline for green politics.

Ecology

The most fundamental concern of green politics, ecology, is a field of science fertilised by fear. In the early 1980s, the big scare was acid rain, an alleged effect of industrial pollution that was threatening to kill the Black Forest and other remaining woodlands in Germany and its neighbours. This perceived hazard was useful for the ecological agenda because atmospheric contaminants could not be tackled at the national level alone; the Greens espoused universal responsibility.

Farmers, as custodians of the land, were seen as an essential ally for the Greens against government diktat, particularly on the blanket use of agrochemicals. An example of this was documented by Christopher Booker and Richard North in Scared to Death (2007): the use of dangerous organophosphates was mandated by UK authorities, who prioritised pest control over farmers’ health.². To the Marxist element, however, farmers were a traditional foe as the originators of exploitative labour and land ownership.

Apolitical Greens struggled to persuade leftist members that socialist countries (such as East Germany) were no less polluting than the capitalist West, absent a profit motive. In the Soviet Union, the vast Aral Sea had almost completely dried out from unsustainable irrigation, leaving the incongruent sight of rusty trawlers stranded on parched ground.³. Hard-left materialists favoured heavy industry led by the workers, wary of mass redundancy resulting from a unilateral shift to renewable energy. Automation was looming, and while the Greens saw benefits in a shorter working week, they had no ready answer for the threatened loss of productive activity – a basic human need.

Social responsibility

A seminal text was the persuasive and pragmatic Small is Beautiful by Fritz Schumacher (1973)⁴. Schumacher opposed the pursuit of eternal growth, as it led to ever-larger organisations, alienation of ordinary people and ecological destruction. But he appreciated the importance of industry, having spent 20 years as an economic advisor to the National Coal Board in the UK.

The Greens were aware that inhibiting the consumption of finite resources would hit the poor hard. They pledged to protect the working class when that generally meant indigenous German people. Unemployment was a serious problem in German society, reaching 9.6% in February 1983 before beginning a steady decline. There was a large Turkish manual labour workforce, and the Greens denounced institutional prejudice. Immigration was not a prominent topic then; instead the Greens focused on helping people in poorer parts of the world by urging redistribution of wealth and enabling Third World countries to develop trade.

The Greens saw female engagement as crucial to changing the system. Mainstream parties were stuck in a patriarchal order, and male politicians often laughed when Green representatives expressed feminist ideas in the Bundestag. In the political arena, women felt that they had to be twice as good as men to be given any respect. Marxists within the green movement were also inclined to sexist attitudes despite their emancipatory rhetoric. Relishing tribal politics, they were not the best advocates of the humanistic paradigm, but by promoting disadvantaged groups, they could undermine the ancien regime.

Grassroots democracy

Proportional representation in Germany enabled the Greens to gain a foothold in regional assemblies and later at the national level. Decentralisation was a core principle for the Greens against the rigid hierarchies perpetuated by conventional parties. Rudolf Bahro, a founder of the Green Party, envisaged society returning to pre-industrial hamlets of about three thousand people, not under feudal yoke, but working together for a sustainable, harmonious livelihood. Many of his peers saw this as unrealistic. A power vacuum would soon be filled, so the Greens needed a wider plan of administration. Averse to the nation-state and its proclivities for xenophobia, war and imperialism, the Greens proposed ‘bioregions’. They believed that such entities would form naturally from shared culture and terrain that crossed artificial borders.

Looking ahead, the Greens saw much potential in European federalism. They were wary of the European Economic Community, formerly a coal and steel industry cartel. The EEC had limited power, but the Greens hoped to become a political force in Brussels and to change the middle letter to ‘ecological’. Steered by Belgian⁵ And German campaigners, the movement joined an alliance after the 1984 European parliament elections, the Rainbow group winning twenty seats on 3.8% of the overall vote.

Nonviolence

The Greens were fundamentally opposed to violence. They were aware of its counterproductive effect as political action, deterring public support and drawing strong-arm policing. The Marxists were always up for a fight, although the murderous actions of the Baader-Meinhof gang had discredited violent extremism.⁶. The main focus of this policy, though, was not on restraining Green Party members but on the pervasive violence of the state.

Indeed, the Greens arose from the campaign for nuclear disarmament. East Germany was then a frontline Soviet satellite state, and the main West German political parties accepted NATO installation of Pershing short-range missiles. The German Greens were inspired by the women protesting at the US Air Force base at Greenham Common in England.⁷. A kinder, safer world was possible if men and their machines were restrained. The Greens demanded a nuclear-free Europe (not only removing weapons but civil power stations too).

Prospects for the Green Movement

While the gravest perceived danger to humanity in the 1970s was nuclear war, economic hardship was a daily household reality. For green politics to make progress, both of these threats needed to be ameliorated. By the mid-1980s, fears about unemployment and inflation eased, and the Cold War cooled despite the sabre-rattling of Ronald Reagan. The futility of war had been amply demonstrated by the loss of the American military-industrial complex to bare-foot soldiers in Vietnam, and the Red Army was being similarly humiliated in Afghanistan. The prospect of peace, however, was not enough to save humanity. For the Greens, rampant consumerism was harming the planet.

In the ensuing tension between the original Greens and their Marxist befrienders, the outcome was inevitable. Whereas the former had a naïve spiritual outlook on Mother Nature, the party benefited from the latter’s political prowess, particularly in organising protests to attract media coverage. Homeopathy and yoga were no match for Hegelian dialectic. But there were also significant differences among the left-wingers. Some saw the Greens’ distaste for capitalist exploitation as a platform for the proletarian principles of Karl Marx (‘workers of the world unite’): they were more interested in factories than in forests. Others were Cultural Marxists, inspired by student leader Rudi Dutschke to ‘march through the institutions’⁸. Feminism was the gateway to other emancipatory struggles in identity politics.

The friction was felt by Roland Vogt, a founder of the Greens, who was concerned by the hidden agenda of the leftist influx: –

The major problem with the growth the Greens are experiencing is that more and more people are coming into the party who are not really Green, not holistically minded. The core Greens may become a minority! Those people are using the instrument created by others.⁹

The Marxists were swinging a double-edged sword. Their aggressive methods were not always welcomed, but with their political nous and strategic approach, they certainly helped the Green Party to be taken seriously. By the late 1980s, green policies were increasingly adopted by the major parties, Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats. Meanwhile, the movement grew elsewhere in Europe; in the UK, the Ecology Party, quietly founded in 1973, attracted some influential figures, including former BBC sports presenter David Icke.

Spretnak and Capra, in the last line of Green Politics, declared that ‘the future, if there is to be one, is Green’. But the green fingers of campaigners were bloodied by the heavy spadework of the Red entryists. Forty years on, we can see where ecological extremism is taking us, and it is not the sunlit uplands that the nascent Green movement promised.

Notes

1.   Spretnak C, Capra F (1984): Green Politics: the Global Promise. Paladin.

2.   Booker C, North R (2007): Scared to Death: From BSE to Global Warming: Why Scares are Costing us the Earth. Continuum.

3.   Daily Mail (5 April 2010): How the Aral Sea – once half the size of England – has dried up.

4.   Schumacher EF (1973): Small is Beautiful: a Study of Economics as if People Mattered. Blond & Briggs.

5.   The first green political parties to gain seats in a national government were the Agalev and Ecolo, representing Flemish and Walloon areas respectively.

6.   Ascherson N (28 September 2008): A terror campaign of love and hate. Observer. The author stated that ‘life on Earth is more threatened now than in the 1980s’ due to climate change.

7.   Johnson R (28 July 2023): Date with history: what we Greenham Common women achieve. Chatham House.

8.   Oulds R, McCrae N (2020): Moralitis: a Cultural Virus. Bruges Group.

9.   Quoted by Spretnak & Capra (1984).

CHAPTER 2

Parallel lines: the march from Frankfurt

In his polemic Watermelons, journalist James Delingpole identified Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci as a seminal influence on the current climate change delusion: –

He was the man – round glasses, weird sticky-up hair – whose writings in the 1920s and 1930s led to the idea of a ‘culture war’. Gramsci argued that in the great ideological battle between left and right, it didn’t matter what happened in the arena of pure politics. Presidents, prime ministers and political parties may come and go, but if you can capture the hearts and minds of an entire society, then you’ve won the war for all eternity. So it was that the left-wing disciples of Gramsci began their ‘long march through the institutions’. They occupied schools, universities, the media, the arts – anywhere they could exert their power to shape the way the broader culture (that’s you and me) thinks about the world.¹

When Gramsci was writing from his prison cell in the 1930s, his concern was fascism, not fossil fuels, but his words were instructive for any movements against the ancien regime. Jailed for communist agitation in Italy, Gramsci mused in his Prison Notebooks² on why social stratification had persisted in the West and suggested how to create the conditions for revolutionary success. Civic society was strong in Western Europe, which would need to be weakened by a Marxist onslaught, aiming beyond the ‘economic substructure’ to the ‘cultural superstructure’. This would be a slow process rather than the rapid, violent uprising of October 1917 in Russia. Delingpole attributed the phrase ‘long march through the institutions’ to Gramsci, although this was coined by German student leader Rudi Dutschke in the 1970s, inspired by the Long March of Mao Zedong.

Critical Theory and the Frankfurt School

Although Gramsci was an inspiration, he did not invent Cultural Marxism. That dubious honour is more appropriately awarded to a group of professors in Germany who reeled from reparations for the Great War. Radical socialists realised that the working classes in the democratic West would not agitate for a communist revolution. This was partly due to patriotism but also because living standards were gradually improving. The vicissitudes of a callous capitalist economy, having been ameliorated by Christian philanthropy in the nineteenth century, were more assertively challenged by socialist representation in parliament and the burgeoning trade union movement. Fearing strikes and unrest, the political establishment was keen to present itself as socially progressive, particularly after the carnage of the war.

As shown by the national elections and the failed general strike of 1926, the citizenry did not want to burn the house down. Meanwhile, the fledgling Soviet Union showed the difficulty of building a new society by reforming human motivation and behaviour. Faith, folklore and family bonds could not be wiped away to leave a blank slate. Marxist scholars realised that nothing changes unless the underlying culture is changed. The guidance for this reorientation came from the Institute for Social Research, founded in Frankfurt in 1923. So began a long campaign against the foundational elements of our culture that maintain stability, order and belonging.

Everything right is wrong

After the rise and fall of Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich, there was much for psychologists to reflect on. During the Second World War, public and private funds were provided to researchers in the USA to explore why people were drawn to totalitarian ideologies. Among them was Frankfurt School alumnus Theodor Adorno, who in 1947 devised the F Scale, a personality test