Happy birthday, Earth!

Dave Richardson's picture

On April 22 more than 500 million people around the world celebrated, as they do every year. There were ceremonies, proclamations, and news stories. There were donations and gifts. There were acts of service. Our schools devoted whole portions of the curriculum to this birthday.

For years our schools have sent home little banks with our elementary kids to collect donations for the Nature Conservancy or one of its numerous shell organizations.

Who are we celebrating? It’s Mother Earth, of course, because it’s Earth Day! Even the United Nations declares April 22 as International Mother Earth Day.

Have you ever looked into Earth Day, though, and wondered what the celebration is really all about? Most of us grew up with Earth Day, and think it is a wonderful idea. I was in third grade when it all started.

The first Earth Day was April 22, 1970, and it was organized by two committed environmentalists, Wisconsin senator Gaylord Nelson and Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich.

Who are these guys, and why did they create this celebration? Well, let’s see. Gaylord Nelson said in his book “Beyond Earth Day: Fulfilling the Promise,” “The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around.” What does that sound like? I’ll get to that in a minute.

Paul Ehrlich is famous (or infamous) for his 1968 book “The Population Bomb” in which he predicted huge death tolls within a decade from material shortages and rape of the environment due to overpopulation.

Both Nelson and Ehrlich advocated population control and environmentalism for saving humanity and the Earth. A critical component of this agenda is the reduction and eventual elimination of private property.

It is considered unfair that some people have property and others don’t, and unequal if a few people have a lot, while everyone else has little by comparison.

It is impossible to manage the environment unless we all collectively (publicly) own the land instead of individuals. So in the name of protecting endangered species, clean water and air, and climate change, private property must end.

Nelson and Ehrlich were socialists.

Mainstream environmentalism has never been about just conservation, but it has always been a cover for totalitarian government control and the restriction and end of private property.

The Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements from the U.N. cited unacceptable living conditions for “vast numbers of people ... as a result of ... inequitable economic growth ... between countries and between [individual] human beings, ... ecological and environmental deterioration, ... and the increasing degradation of life-supporting resources of air, water, and land.”

The establishment of “a just and equitable world economic order” require “necessary changes.”

And what might these changes be? They are many.

Crucial to this plan is changing private property. The Vancouver Action Plan states that “Land, because of its unique nature ... cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth [meaning “inequality”] and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings-and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.”

It’s not just the greedy corporate CEO that is the obstacle to social justice. It’s you owning your own home, and having the right to do whatever you want on your own property. You are the perpetuator of inequality and injustice.

This declaration eventually gave rise to a movement called sustainable development and a whole plan called Agenda 21. Look for it in a neighborhood near you. Governor Deal already signed it into law in a previous legislative session.

When I was in college I spent most of the summer of 1983 in the first country to set aside all forests, waters, and minerals as national property.

Billions of acres were nature preserves that were off limits to humans even for hunting and fishing. For nearly a century they had mandatory days for cleaning the streets, fixing public parks, recycling, planting trees, and other community service, long before there ever was an Earth Day.

The country’s founder personally participated in these days of community service, and the world cheered.

You never heard about this environmentally friendly country? Of course you have! It was the Soviet Union.

Vladimir I. Lenin, the founder, said in his book “On the National Pride of the Great Russians” (I bought many of his books while I was there) that we must use “every revolutionary means to combat ... the landowners and capitalists ... the worst enemies of our country.”

Among those “every revolutionary means” ... wait for it ... environmentalism. Environmentalism is a classic tool of socialism.

And those days of service to the environment in the Soviet Union — they happened every year on Lenin’s birthday, which is April 22nd.

The first Earth Day was on Lenin’s 100th birthday. Coincidence? Who knows?

So, Happy Earth Day. Oh, and Happy Birthday, Vlad!

[David Richardson of Peachtree City coordinates the Assumptions Project. He has a Master of Theology degree from Oxford University and is a recognized expert on the religious attitudes and beliefs of university professors. He, his wife, and his children have lived in Fayette County for over 22 years.]

Shareholder's picture
Joined: 04/25/2012
Republican Teddy Roosevelt would be spinning in his grave

There should be nothing partisan about conservation of earth's resources.
Just because a certain group embraces an idea does not make the idea bad. I think Hitler embraced Christmas.....if you want to follow such logic.

Easter Island blockheads left appropriate monuments behind for their decendents. What would you build with your last tree?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Joined: 12/31/2008
There is responsible Environmentalism

and then there is the radical version. Saving the blue spotted fly and allowing homes to burn as a result is stupid at best.

RKS's picture
Joined: 07/23/2009
D Richardson Earth Day

You gotta stop reading Glenn Beck stuff dude. Why is it that everything has to be a conspiracy and about destroying free trade and capitalism? Why is it that your type assume every environmentalist is a radical Marxist? Ugh.....such silliness.

lexveritas's picture
Joined: 01/05/2010
You Are Absolutely Right

You are right on the money, RKS. We live with a PERMANENT underclass of prejudiced, uneducated, and highly thoughtless and deceptive malcontents who see CONSPIRACY, MARXISM, SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, and all sorts of other "isms" in nearly every productive human endeavor. They have no life at all. They pound their fists constantly in the pages of this newspaper. And they have no credibility at all. Look at their track record: they have spent years diverting the public's attention toward absurd non-issues while the powerful financial and industrial interests of this country have stolen from the public incessantly. So while these folks were dismissing "environmentalism" as a hoax, these criminal interests - Lehman Brothers, AIG, Bear Sterns, CitiBank, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs - were destroying the economy and bringing on a near depression. "Environmentalism" is not the real threat to capitalism. The criminal interests that bankrupted the economy will destroy capitalism on their own!

lexveritas's picture
Joined: 01/05/2010
McCarthyism Is Alive and Well!

McCarthyism - finding and seeing and detecting communists and socialists everywhere, especially where people disagree with you - is alive and well on the pages of the CITIZEN. Nice to see that "religious" people still find communists behind every idea they dislike, communists behind every idea that conflicts with their own religious views, communists behind every teaching in schools that conflicts with their own views, whatever. "Environmentalism is a classic tool of socialism"....did you really say that? The New Testament teaches us to be good stewards of the gifts of the earth - so now, does that make Jesus a socialist? Such garbage. Americans are abandoning their traditional churches and religious affiliations in large numbers, and this kind of infantile imagining gives us some understanding of why that is happening.
This tribal nonsense doesn't pass the smell test, Mr. Richardson.
Shame on you, CITIZEN, for publishing such utter nonsense.
On the other hand, how nostalgic to hear Joe McCarthy whistling in the wind again.

renault314's picture
Joined: 07/03/2007
lex, just wondering

if you or anyone in your family owns property? cause that would make you a capitalist pig eco terrorist like the rest of us.

renault314's picture
Joined: 07/03/2007
Word of truth?? is that what your name means?

my latin is a little rusty. But even if its not, you should try it.
"Environmentalism is a classic tool of socialism"....is true, since its under the guise of environmentalisim that communists in russia and china abolished privet property rights. This fact is not in dispute. You try to argue against the authors claim that every environmentalist in America is a socialist, but this is a straw man, since the author made no such claim. What he did say was that people who favor wealth redistribution and those who want to end private property rights ( I.E. socialists) in this country will likely use phony trumped up environmentalisim as their tool.
As far as Jesus being a communist becasue we are supposed to steward the Earth, well that logical fallacy is called the red herring i think. Apropos?
Now, if Jesus had said, "let's end private ownership of homes because it's not fair and heard everyone into Gov't owned housing so everyone is equal and I'll use stewarding the earth as an excuse to justify this" then that WOULD have made him a pinko commie.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Joined: 10/26/2005
Not quite right about McCarthy there, lex

McCarthyism was a mostly fear-based campaign to uncover communists who were working for the U.S. government. McCarthy named a few, but claimed to have the names of many more that he kept to himself. His goal was to give himself the spotlight and like a lot of people in Washington, he thought it would advance his career. The fear was that people thought communists in government would be bad for the country since they would try and disrupt the capitalistic system that was key to our strong economy and our strong military during the beginning of the Cold War. Any real or imagined communists were fired and they did nothing to the government or the economy. Much ado about nothing.

Not good to compare that to "Environmentalism is a classic tool of socialism"... since the goal of the environmentalistic socialist is to weaken big business with all sorts of meaningless regulations with the goal of nationalizing those businesses (see GM) and making it almost impossible for individuals to thrive through the creation and growth of small businesses. The reason I say there is no comparison to McCarthyism is that McCarthy failed in his campaign, but the enviro-socialists have succeeded almost completely with their goals - thanks largely to the enviro-in-chief and his efforts to kill off coal and oil (by making them so expensive) in order to promote wind and solar which would then appear cheap by comparison. Well, they didn't succeed completely because they were outed, but they were close.

And yet, knowing all this, Prezbo will still get almost half the popular vote in November. Unbelievable! Only saving grace is all the unemployed union members from rust belt states will have had time to figure all this out and they will vote against him and Ohio, PA, Michigan, etc. go for Romney.
You don't have to like Romney to dislike Obama and his economy (or Bush's economy for the truly clueless out there).

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Joined: 04/23/2007
RWM - Environmentalism

I don't believe that environmental socialist want to "weaken big business" as their primary goal. Clearly they do believe that big business is evil but it is also a great source of political funding if you blackmail it correctly.

I think the goals of the green movement are to transfer wealth from "rich" nations to "poor" nations and use fear to fund political power.

I suppose I could go into a whole list of actions taken by the United Nations, the US Government, the G7, the World Bank, etc. but it would take far too long.

The socialist have simply found a "cause" that would be difficult if not impossible to prove, set up a government funded "science" machine to study the "problem" and get the masses to believe it. What better cause than "mother earth", threatened by those evil capitalists and their consumer slaves? The solution? Well move all that pollution to areas of the world that don't have pollution and "encourage" poor nations to "develop" all at the same time. That way they can help the poor people of "emerging" nations at the expense of rich selfish nations that have far too much. That would be US folks.

Using the green movement, socialists have "exposed" the evil of consumerism and our individual and collective complicity in the rape of our plant. It's the perfect storm of citizen good intention and cynical manipulation. Nothing like guilt to drive a herd mentality to meet the goal of social environmental "justice"!

Their success at convincing hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people that global warming, aka climate change, is caused by human activity has employed countless bureaucrats worldwide.

Global climate change caused by humans is a sham and it is one of the only successful "industries" created by government. Just think of all those palms that are greased and how many votes are purchased, just imagine. For the political elite, its a beautiful business model.

In the end the green movement has cost many, many people their livelihoods and increased artificially the prices all products consumed.

So folks, keep buying the Al Gore line, he needs all the dough he can possibly get and so do all of the government cronies that profit on the backs of the little guy, the forgotten man.

SPQR's picture
Joined: 12/15/2007

Let's not overlook the "war on drugs industry"

"Global climate change caused by humans is a sham and
it is one of the only successful "industries" created
by government".

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Joined: 12/31/2008
Oh poor poor Robert you used logic and reason

on the illogical and unreasonable.

These fine folk still believe Man is responsible for Global Warming not the Earth nor that glowing ball of Nuclear fire in space.

Good luck using that argument.

conditon55's picture
Joined: 03/12/2010
Disney's Space Ship Earth

At Disney world it is space ship Earth. Now it has 7 billion people. Population is up 80% in my life time. All burning fuel for power and mobility. Soon it will be 9 billion people.

So it is not the same world as when brave pioneers set out to conquer the western USA. That time is gone. The archaic pastoral past.

If we keep burning stuff at the rate we are now, soon we will all be choking on our own exhaust. And that won't be fun.

All corner of the world are settled and claimed. it is a brave new world.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Joined: 12/31/2008
Wow...just wow

David excellent article. The radical environmentalist agenda i.e. Global Warming scam has penetrated the deepest levels of our Government.. See Van Jones, Al Gore et.al.

These radicals clearly have as their agenda a move towards taking control by any means available the very Freedoms we have.

Their agenda is driving this Administration. Moratorium of Drilling, attacking the Coal industry forcing mines to close causing a weakness in our energy supply. All radical moves to support their radical ideas.

Again David spot on....

yeahwhatever's picture
Joined: 08/09/2008

Excellent article on "Earth Day" and its origins. I love the environment and desire to protect it, but I will never put the welfare of the environment before the welfare of people. So many in the community blindly follow this event in blissful ignorance of its true, original meaning and design. They mean well but as the old saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions," or in this case, the road to a Marxist society. Keep taking care of the environment, but do it intelligently, logically, and without compromising the principles of freedom, including freedom of religion. Never put the welfare of the environment ahead of the welfare of your fellow man, and never sign up to support something without knowing exactly what the promoters are promoting.

RKS's picture
Joined: 07/23/2009
yeahwhatever wrote:

Excellent article on "Earth Day" and its origins. I love the environment and desire to protect it, but I will never put the welfare of the environment before the welfare of people. So many in the community blindly follow this event in blissful ignorance of its true, original meaning and design. They mean well but as the old saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions," or in this case, the road to a Marxist society. Keep taking care of the environment, but do it intelligently, logically, and without compromising the principles of freedom, including freedom of religion. Never put the welfare of the environment ahead of the welfare of your fellow man, and never sign up to support something without knowing exactly what the promoters are promoting.

What a silly thing to say. If you don't take care of Mother Earth, your people won't have anything to breathe or a safe place to live. Why is that an environmentalist has to be called "radical environmentalist" and then to say it leads to Marxism? That's just silliness.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Joined: 12/31/2008
Because there is difference
RKS wrote:

Why is that an environmentalist has to be called "radical environmentalist" and then to say it leads to Marxism? That's just silliness.

A typical Environmentalist (myself included) believes that Capitalism is good for the Country. We believe that while yes Green Energy is preferable the movement is and should be done in incremental steps. We need Coal and Oil right now because our Economy is based on it's use. Without it our economy would falter then fail leaving no options for Green technologies... After all how would you PAY for them?

Radical so-called Environmentalist want Green Energy NOW..It's a "We can't wait" philosophy (see Van Jones, Obama Al Gore et al.) so they will cripple our economy without regard as to how to pay for their precious "Green" energy.

These Radical Environmentalist believe that the Earth is going to burn soon or maybe someday or whenever and that justifies forcing Americans mind you, not the World, just us to conform and conform NOW.
It matters not to the Radical Environmentalist that viable Green energy is still just a pipe dream they believe that by focusing and through levitation they can create the energy to get it done... oops get them confused with the Occupy crowd for a moment then again maybe not.

ptc87's picture
Joined: 06/19/2011
Earth Day is not a communist

Earth Day is not a communist plot. Earth Day was founded in the US by Senator Gaylord Nelson. This article looks like something Glenn Beck would dream up. Grab a few coincidences and create a conspiricy. Here is what really happened-
"Nelson chose the date in order to maximize participation on college campuses for what he conceived as an "environmental teach-in". He determined the week of April 19–25 was the best bet as it did not fall during exams or spring breaks.[52] Moreover, it did not conflict with religious holidays such as Easter or Passover, and was late enough in spring to have decent weather. More students were likely to be in class, and there would be less competition with other mid-week events—so he chose Wednesday, April 22." Wiki.

Recent Comments