Martin Durkin On the Very Brown, Anti-Humanity Roots Of The Modern Green Movement

To understand today’s Green Movement, it is necessary to go back almost a thousand years in history. Prominent television producer and director Martin Durkin does precisely just that in his outstanding recent essay: NAZI GREENS – An Inconvenient History, where he writes of the movement’s “gushing idealization of ‘Nature’”.

Makes us wonder why the current Pope has hitched the Vatican wagon to the green movement. Could he be so misled, or cunning?

Some excerpts:

How can anyone read the Nazi Heidegger, or the writers of the Volk movement, or indeed Mein Kampf, and say, with a straight face, that environmentalism started with Rachel Carson?

And:

Like Nietzsche and the Volkists, Hitler and the Nazis hated the Enlightenment.  They rejected its humanism just as they spurned the human-centered morality of the Judeo-Christian tradition.”

And:

In short, the Volkists and Nazis were green.  In 1934, a year after the Nazis took power, as Professor Thomas Lekan describes, they ‘declared that the Third Reich had ushered in a new era of environmental stewardship … They foresaw a new era of ‘organic’ land use planning that stressed long-term sustainability over short-term profitability.’  The leading Nazi Walther Schoenichen declared that the German countryside was to be purified of the ‘un-German spirit of commerce.’  The same year they passed a law ‘Concerning the Protection of the Racial purity of Forest Plants’, and the following year the wide-ranging Reichsnaturschutzgesetz (Reich Nature Protection Law). “

And:

Of course the green policies of the Nazis, like the policies of the greens today, were riddled with contradictions.”

One of these horrendous contradictions is the large-scale blighting of Germany’s idyllic landscape heritage with industrial wind turbines – now numbering close to 25,000.

Durkin advises:

We should heed the warning of Lukács, that, ‘fascist demagogy and tyranny was only the ultimate culmination of a long process which initially had an “innocent” look’.”

Great essay, one that will certainly rattle the green ideologues to the core. Here we see what these people really are. When we look at some of the German scientists behind the movement (won’t mention names) it’s all crystal clear.

MUST READ

18 responses to “Martin Durkin On the Very Brown, Anti-Humanity Roots Of The Modern Green Movement”

  1. DirkH

    Well …
    “Like Nietzsche and the Volkists, Hitler and the Nazis hated the Enlightenment. ”

    So, I didn’t read all of Nietzsche, just Jenseits von Gut und Böse and I think Also sprach Zarathustra and I don’t remember that. He rails a lot against Christian “Mitleidsethos”, that much I remember.

    So what’s the wikipedia say…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-Enlightenment
    “After an initial defence of the Enlightenment in his so-called ‘middle period’ (late-1870s to early 1880s), Nietzsche turned vehemently against it and subscribed to the earlier view of conservative Counter-Revolutionaries like Burke and Maistre who attributed the French Revolution (which Nietzsche always hated) to the Enlightenment.”

    Well hating the French Revolution is perfectly acceptable to me;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror
    as the revolutionaries had this idea that all they had to do was kill anyone critical of the revolution and they would then be left with everyone happy with the revolution. (Natural selection, see Darwin, Galton, Marx(“Klassenkampf”))

    Sure a weird way of making sure people are happy in my opinion. But to each his own.

  2. yonason

    “…Spiegel magazine runs an article on the rise of extremist RIGHT-WING environmentalism in Germany.” [my emphasis]

    I suppose this won’t do any more good than it ever has, but for the billionth time, Nazis were Left wing, not Right.
    http://jonjayray.tripod.com/hitler.html
    It was the National SOCIALIST Worker’s Party, not the RNC.

    It’s one of the Left’s dirty tricks, relabeling in order to obfuscate the historical significance of events, for the purpose of shielding themselves from deserved criticism and redirecting it to their opponents.

    1. yonason

      Other than that, his article is quite good.

    2. yonason

      In John Ray’s link, he reference an article by John Bolt, originally from 2003, so it’s not like this wasn’t out there.
      http://wickeddox.blogspot.com/2007/04/hitler-green-guru-by-australian.html

  3. DirkH

    And re Durkin and Hitler’s Greenery, I’m a bit astonished he doesn’t mention the Wandervogel, the pre-Nazi proto-Hippie movement
    http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html
    70% of them became members of the NSDAP as the Nazis were the only party having environmentalism in their program.

  4. yonason
  5. mem

    Now, now…
    If the Nazis were greens and environmentalists it doesn’t mean that the greens and environmentalists are Nazis, does it?
    It would be an error of logic to assume or to insinuate such a thing.

    1. Colorado Wellington

      Now, now …
      If totalitarians hate individual liberties it doesn’t mean that haters of individual liberties are totalitarians, does it? That would be an error in logic.

    2. yonason

      “If the Nazis were greens and environmentalists it doesn’t mean that the greens and environmentalists are Nazis, does it?
      It would be an error of logic to assume or to insinuate such a thing.” – mem

      Ahh, but while logic leads one to ask how much they had in common, the answer actually comes from history As DirkH points out, above…
      http://notrickszone.com/2016/02/28/martin-durkin-on-the-very-brown-anti-humanity-roots-of-the-modern-green-movement/comment-page-1/#comment-1087521
      …70% of them joined the Party. That number was far in excess of the average German, who apparently had more scruples.

  6. John F. Hultquist

    Thanks Pierre.
    I had to find a little info on Volkists and “the Volk” – and still have the reading to do. Also, awhile back I looked for one of your posts but did not find it.
    You did a post about the Greens taking the lead on the Kyoto Protocol whereby reunited Germany benefited from the shuttering of inefficient industries of East Germany to the detriment of the rest of the developed world.

    If it is not too much trouble, can you add a link to that post.

  7. If All You See… » Pirate's Cove

    […] blog of the day is No Tricks Zone, with a post on the anti-humanity roots of the modern green […]

  8. cementafriend

    Yonason, correct – Hitler and Stalin were socialist dictators – this from Wiki “Diplomats from the two countries addressed the common ground of anti-capitalism and anti-democracy, stating “there is one common element in the ideology of Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union: opposition to the capitalist democracies,”[13][15] “neither we nor Italy have anything in common with the capitalist west” and “it seems to us rather unnatural that a socialist state would stand on the side of the western democracies.”[16]”
    The people in the EU including Germany do not seem able to see that Brussels is heading towards a bureaucratic dictatorship in which national interests will mean nothing and democratic decisions overruled by regulation. Britain is best out of the EU which hopefully will lead to a collapse of the EU and the formation of new free trade associations (such as Australia has with China, Japan, Singapore, Thailand and USA – Australia does not need to buy anything from Europe but would like to sell its high quality apples, beef, coal, iron ore, wheat, wine etc in an open market of competition. Just think of cheaper electricity and cheaper -better quality food on your plate (and in your glass).

  9. yonason

    “The people in the EU including Germany do not seem able to see that Brussels is heading towards a bureaucratic dictatorship” – cementafriend

    I’m not sure who isn’t affected, to one degree or another, by some kind of collective insanity. The world seems to go through spasms of it periodically, where screwball leaders rally a minority of devious and aggressive followers, who together hijack the majority who want nothing more than to live their lives peacefully and productively, but aren’t sufficiently clever, brave, strong or organized enough to resist. One would like to think that at some point we will be rid of the rogues, and the sooner the better.

  10. John Shade

    The two books on my shelves on this are:
    ‘Nazi Oaks’ by R Mark Musser. Published by Advantage Books in 2010, third printing January 2013.
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nazi-Oaks-Sacrifice-Christian-Worldview/dp/0692381465

    ‘The Environmental Movement in Germany’ by Raymond H. Dominick III. Published by Indiana University Press in 1992.
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Environmental-Movement-Germany-Prophets-1871-1971/dp/025331819X

  11. Asmilwho

    For those who read German, this is a nice book:

    Das Grüne Gewissen
    Andreas Möller

    Talks about the roots of the german green movement from 19th C Romantik forwards

  12. Stephen Wilde

    Consider the range of available political stances as a circle placing absolute freedom without any rules at the front and absolute authoritarianism with little or no freedom and opppressive rules at the back.

    Democracy would be about halfway back on either side of the circle as a sort of authoritarianism of the majority.

    Fascism (Hitler) and communism (Stalin) nestle side by side at the back.

    1. Colorado Wellington

      Stephen,

      I agree that that National Socialism and International Socialism are nestled comfortably side-by-side, defined by their totalitarian nature and barely distinguishable from each other by their minor differences. I’ve been in the fight to discredit this Stalinist design of placing Communism on the extreme left and Nazism on the extreme right of the political scale for much of my adult life. I remember hearing about the concept of a political circle*) more than 40 years ago but nobody ever explained to me how it actually works. It seems that it tries to “fix” the popular but fraudulent 20th century left-right scale**) by bending it to connect the totalitarian ends in the back. The problem is that it still doesn’t say what the direction to the left or right actually defines if both ends are totalitarian. In my view nothing at all, and I’ve challenged leftists over the decades to explain coherently what it means. Nobody did. All it does is to smear conservative and libertarian anti-communists with a Nazi association which was its original and only purpose (and even that was subject to change depending on the changing relations of the two systems).
      ———-
      *) there are various proposals of multi-dimensional charts (political compass, Nolan, etc.) but none of them is the circle considered here.
      **) The Left and Right designations had some meaning in the layout of the political forces around the French Revolution but that’s that last time they did.

      1. Colorado Wellington

        Errata: delete that leading extra “that” and change the final “that” to “the” (I sure overthatted this thing)