UK Chancellor Gordon Brown Wants ‘New World Order’ to Fight Global Warming

March 13th, 2007

A few of you just don’t want to accept that your most precious, deeply held religious beliefs were created by evil people to control you.

If you want to spout off like a deranged, Pentecostal snake handler, that’s fine with me, but if you’re still capable of critical thinking, spend a few minutes with these posts:

Energy Scarcity vs. Cost of the War in Iraq

Is Peak Oil a Faith Based Collapse Theory?

All Electric Vehicles and the Concept of Enough

A Fascist for Every Occasion

Or, maybe I’ve gotten it wrong and the diabolical Gordon Brown is our buddy and I should ask all British people to support the calls for a New World Order, various fart taxes, scheduled blackouts, states of emergency, national ID cards, etc. when all of this is mostly about a big, fat fascist lockdown so the elite can have total control over the raw materials (including potable water) that are left on the planet for themselves, while the rest of us are tracked, traced and surveilled 24 hours per day… Hmmm.

If you buy into this, rather than trying to tell me to shut up, why don’t you just close down your browser and never come back here? Better yet, demonstrate your green credentials by killing yourself so that your Earth murdering breath doesn’t add more CO2 to the atmosphere.

Via: Guardian:

Chancellor Gordon Brown is seeking to regain the initiative on the environment with a call for a “new world order” to combat climate change.

Ahead of the launch of the Government’s Climate Change Bill on Tuesday, the Chancellor will herald the Government’s role in new European emissions standards and call for the UN to prioritise the fight against global warming.

15 Responses to “UK Chancellor Gordon Brown Wants ‘New World Order’ to Fight Global Warming”

  1. BillS Says:

    New World Order to fight climate change???? Tell me this is a joke.

  2. BG Says:

    I think that people really do desperately want change, but they are too afraid to come forward and face the true oppressors.The others are too blinded and distracted by American Idol and the like…

  3. Matt Savinar Says:


    Let’s say you get bit by an animal out there on the farm, you go to the doc and he says “I will now commence fucking you in the ass to treat the bite..” Okay, clearly the doc is an ass but that doesn’t mean that you didn’t get bit by an animal.

    PO and GW are real problems. That the elite plan to fuck us over while saving themselves does not mean they aren’t real problems.

  4. Kevin Says:

    Interesting analogy, Matt. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

    The point is that there are simple and sensible ways to produce clean energy, but they don’t lend themselves to pathological, top down control methods used by diabolical criminals. That’s why we don’t have them, and that’s why we won’t have them until most of us are killed-off, and the remainder are electronically micromanaged and surveilled in the name of “climate control” or “the terrorists” or some other bullshit scam. All of the above, maybe!

    I’ve shown this over and over again, and linked to the stories above, FYI. But you and I have gone over this repeatedly, so… I’ll just conclude with this:

    Cui bono + Ordo ab chao = Same as it ever was.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    With regards to top down control of energy systems:

    Why the free market fails consumers in sustainable energy innovation

  6. Matt Savinar Says:


    Put another way:

    Altough the sources you link to do have the advantage of being cleaner and decentralized than fossil fuels they aren’t even close – not by a longshot – in terms of energy density or energy portability.

    As far as religion, you seem to have one too which is that any major problem in energy or the environment is just something fabricated by the elite evildoers. Now in many cases (Al-Qaeda, bird flu, etc.) that is the case: totally made up bullshit designed to scare us into submission. But sometimes societies – including ours – have actual reality based environmental problems. To think that all these environmental problems are a fabrications is as much of a faith based as believing any thing else.

    What we’re facing is not really that much different then the Vikings, Romans, etc. faced as they depleted their topsoil or otherwise irrevocacbly damaged their environment. We have proof, for instance, that the Vikings overgrazed their livestock thereby destroying their topsoil which sent their society into collapse. What was the solution offered by the Viking elite? It was to kill the Inuits, wage perpetual war, etc., not unlike what our elite are doing. But the thing is they REALLY did destroy their topsoil. Surely you wouldn’t have me believe that the topsoil crisis was just a big scam by the Viking elite?

    Same thing for the folks on Easter Island. They really did cut down all the trees which was basically the same as we’re doing, that is blowing through ancient sunshine. Now the Rapa Nui elite plunged the island into perpetual warfare as the timber supply declined and their enviroment was trashed. But just because the Rapa Nui elite’s solution was assanine (sp?) doesn’t mean that the problem (running out of timber, trashed environment) was just made up out of thin air so the elite could kick the ass of the island’s peasantry.

    I posit that we have the same situation: legitimate, reality based energy and environmental problems. They are not fabricated by the elite of our society even though the solutions amount to “culling the peasents.”

    That the elite’s solution to resource scarcity is to kill us off and grab what’s left for themselves does not mean that resource scarcity isn’t an actual reality-based problem.

    Is this making any sense?

  7. Kristofer Says:

    i think these examples are straight from jared diamond’s book, Collapse, arent they? highly recommend it, anyway.

  8. Neal Says:

    I think Kev means that global warming etc is overly hyped and that our ability to control and mitigate it is overstated. Not that it doesn’t exist.

    Can we eliminate global warming or terrorism? No. Can we limit their impact by surrendering some of our freedoms? Yes.

    Is the trade off justified? No. Are the authorities trustworthy, honest, or concerned for the common man? No. Will anyone be saved by the NWO regime? No. Will they willingly release control once the “crisis” is past? No.

  9. Doug Mitchell Says:

    You’re making plenty of sense, Matt. Problem is, you’re also missing the point.

    The problems are quite physical, as you assert, and “reality-based” all the way. (and by the way, using that term in this context puts you in some pretty sour company)

    Kevin’s ASSertion, if I am reading him correctly, is with regard to the ongoing interpretation of both the “problems” and possible solutions through the lens of government leadership and their various interests. Am I making sense here?

    Reichsführer Brown’s assertion of the need for a top-down system of strict controls does not address any particular reality except that of the emerging surveillance state. Each time a politico trots out the “new world order” jingle, I flinch and wonder how “reality-based” their awareness is.

    What will you do in say, 2009 or so, when for “security reasons”, personal RFID identifiers become mandatory for citizens of the “reality-based” world? Or are you perhaps already on the pre-approved list for a “KMA” chip?

    Ultimately, the reality we face is not that of “problems”, especially in the political sense, it is one of energy SHORTAGES and pollution SURPLUSES. The carbon dioxide situation is a more challenging nut, as it is not pollution, per se, but an IMBALANCE (overabundance) of a naturally-occuring and very necessary biological compound.

    For what it’s worth, I’m in damned-near 100% agreement with Kevin’s interpretation of events.

    Those in power, whom it has been long-established merely serve those who truly control (start your background reading with Prof. Quigley), are also long-established as prevaricators of the highest order. The Big Lie technique of Goebbels fame, who was simply channeling Bernays, is alive and well in our world. Indeed, it has become de riguer. It is the primary methodology of modern mass leadership.

    The Vikings overgrazed, yes. Easter Island was denuded to the point of cannibalization, yes. Today we face an even larger set of environmental issues/catastrophes looming in the not-too-distant future, yes.

    How do any of these realities alter the fact that what appears to be highly fascistic proposals are being tossed off as solutions to our problems with ever-greater frequency by the footsoldiers of the CFR (Brown, et al.)?

    At what point will you stop being jealous of Kevin’s having found his “hot Kiwi wife” and stop fixating on anal metaphors?

    I don’t believe Kevin is negating any or all of the environmental issues looming large before us, he’s simply questioning the pre-built cognitive frames in which they are being presented.

    There exists outside the megalithic structure of institutional science highly qualified individuals who have raised serious questions with regard to the causes, also without kissing away the larger problems they present. They are being roundly and soundly dismissed, ignored — even by supposedly inquisitive folks such as yourself. Why?

  10. fallout11 Says:

    Well said, Matt.

  11. Matt Savinar Says:

    “At what point will you stop being jealous of Kevin’s having found his ‘hot Kiwi wife’ and stop fixating on anal metaphors?”

    Probably not any time soon.

  12. cryingfreeman Says:

    Religion as a means to control is undeniable. I used to be an impulsive and assertive Fundamentalist Evangelical (but am now a quiet Calvinist) and bought into the whole thing about unquestioning allegiance to the government and the crown, thanks to the morons standing the pulpits. Besides, in the UK we long had the doctrine of Erastianism, the teaching that the sovereign has the right to tell people how to worship, and where and when to do so. It reached boiling point a few centuries ago, when Covenanters in southern Scotland had to flee to the wilderness lest the religious police (for want of a better term) apprehend them and imprison or murder them for refusing to acknowledge the sovereign’s religious authority.

    I know some readers on this site are convinced the forthcoming microchipped society will be a fulfilment of the mark of the beast, but my point is that this mark has to be a religious as well as a economic-political thing. Events like the Scots persecutions point to a future world where not only will the masses be tagged and chipped like cattle, but also forced to surrender their conscience to the elite. Those who don’t will be hounded and treated as non-persons. Meanwhile, the established religious leaders in the so-called mainstream churches will urge the sheeple, in the name of good Christianity, to comply with the governments’ requirements and to pray for the wellbeing of the rulers and the security forces.

  13. Mike Lorenz Says:

    I kinda think both Matt and Kevin are right. Yes, resource depletion (including, but not limited to, PO) and climate change are real event that are only just getting started. The squandering of natural resources is obviously human fault, I mean 1 trillion barrels of oil didn’t spontaneously pump,refine,and burn themselves. The climate change issue is a little murkier with regard to the primary cause. The fact that there was such a broad scientific concensus before any governments really came around to it does seem to add a bit of credibility to the position that humans are making a fair contribution to it. That said, there’s historical evidence to show that this sort of thing has happened before without any help from people.
    Where Kevin and Matt differ, I think, is on the source and motives of the solutions being offered. In the end, the only way we can save ourselves from an ecological or socialogical nightmare can be summed up in two words: small and local. We must have small, local agriculture; small, local government; small, local manufacturing; small, local energy. This is completely anathema to the current system, which is based on ever increasing economies of scale and consolidation of power. That brings us to a point that Kevin has often brought up: that any social collapse will be largely, if not entirely engineered by the global elite. They will do so because it is profitable for them. The technology and resources necessary for us to live small, local, environmentally sensitive lives exists right now. In fact it’s been around for a while. The reason that radical consrevation and localization aren’t being pushed by our corporo-fascist leaders is that there’s no money in it for them. They would rather see us starve, burn, and tear each other apart than make widely available the tools and knowledge necessary to live independent, socially and economically democratic lives.
    Well fuck them. I agree with Kevin that the most potent option we have for resisting is to simply stop playing the game to greatest extent possible. If you don’t depend on them, they can’t control you.
    – Mike Lorenz

  14. Iridescent Cuttlefish Says:

    We don’t need no stinkin’ oil. Never did. Our criminally stupid architecture is responsible for 45% of greenhouse gas emissions, as well as a good deal of energy consumption. There are half a dozen cheap, maintenance-free architectural alternatives which have a positive energy co-efficient. Do some math, people.

    80 years ago William Hale proclaimed that “anything made from hydrocarbons can be made from carbohydrates”–have we regressed, technologically? It’s just more doomsday bullshit. We could fix the whole mess without top-down policy-driven solutions, without any “new” tech at all. I’ve listed resources, projects & links on Kevin’s Electric…post. Smile, people–they want you bumming.

  15. George Kenney Says:

    Check out this history of sunspots:

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.