Communism Extra Stout! Moore, Gibbs Propose Killing Unborn, Revocation Of Property Rights To Save Planet

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Although the newly released Planet of the Humans documentary takes a critical look at green energies, it creators take an even harsher view of western democracy and its free market system.

On Earth Day (April 22nd) film producer Michael Moore held a livestream podcast with director Jeff Gibbs and Ozzie Zehner, where they discuss their documentary and speak about what needs to be done.

Humans are the scourge

One thing is clear: When it comes to the planet, the trio are caught in a self-perpetuating spiral of pessimism which they’ll never be able to climb out of on their own. They view humans as a cancerous disease that has to be urgently stopped.

“The pandemic is because the earth is very upset with us. Timeout!” says Gibbs. “This timeout is good.”

“The planet has cancer,” Moore suggests.

“We are the most destructive creature that ever existed on the planet. We have to own that,” Gibbs adds.

Sold out to big corporations

Director Gibbs also says it’s “really sad” that the top 1% wealthy  – the real enemy” – are involved in the green movement. In their view, the planet is “in very serious, serious trouble” and we have lost our way. The environmental movement, they say, has sold out to big corporations.

Abolish all energy sources!

Moreover all three in the podcast agree that not only fossil fuels are bad, but so are green energies and nuclear. This leaves listeners to wonder: What’s left? Where are humans supposed to get their power from? Squirrel cages?

Megatons of complaint, zero solutions

For all the criticism they have for human activity today, they offer very little in terms of solutions. Instead they declare a profoundly radical yet vague transformation of how humans should live on the planet. “We need to take over the the entire environmental movement, to start a new one,” says Gibbs, one that is aimed at achieving “true sustainability”, which for Gibbs means “less of everything, sharing everything.”

The blueprint of the transformation they’re hinting at, however, hasn’t even reached the concept phase, has not even reached the infancy of being thought out. Yet, they insist it is what we need. They complain endlessly, but offer no real alternatives.

Doing away with property rights, “sharing more”

According to Gibbs, unbridled consumption is the problem. Humans need to start doing less, being lazier, to stop cutting the grass. He also suggests that the element of profit needs to be eradicated from all human activity. So do property rights.

To save the planet, Gibbs declares that humans need to be “sharing more”. Is it really necessary for everyone to own every thing? “Less is the new more,” says Gibbs.

Communism – Extra Stout!

Moore uses the example of sharing bicycles, or even cameras. Everything can be shared. Sharing of course, means no individual property rights. In their world, we’d have to wait 15 years just to get the chance to share a government-issued Lada, let alone own one.

Another way to save the planet, Moore suggests, is to kill the unborn. “You wanna save the planet, support Planned Parenthood.”

What they propose is worse than communism. It’s Communism – Extra Stout. Many people would in fact be denied existence.

When asked if they themselves may be behaving hypocritically when using technology, Gibbs seems to blame others for it, like he wouldn’t need to do it if everyone else just behaved properly. While preaching all this, Zehner is seen drinking from a plastic cup.

Education is bad for the planet?

Zehner even went on to suggest that advanced education is bad for the planet: “PhDs do not have a zero carbon or zero energy impact on the planet. It takes an enormous amount of infrastructure to support a society that educates people, and so when you start going back into the system and looking back at the overall footprint of nuclear, it starts to look a lot different.”

Getting a grip

Overall, Gibbs says it gets down to “getting a grip on ourselves”, and admits that he has not yet figured out how to restrain even himself.

During the podcast, Gibbs frets that since the pandemic began, “something like 20 million people” were born. “If we go back to normal, we’re just gonna go back to the same destruction.”




Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

24 responses to “Communism Extra Stout! Moore, Gibbs Propose Killing Unborn, Revocation Of Property Rights To Save Planet”

  1. Communism Extra Stout! Moore, Gibbs Propose Killing Unborn, Revocation Of Property Rights To Save Planet — NoTricksZone - Climate- Science.press

    […] über Communism Extra Stout! Moore, Gibbs Propose Killing Unborn, Revocation Of Property Rights To Save Pl… […]

  2. mwhite

    “Moore uses the example of sharing bicycles, or even cameras. Everything can be shared”

    Perhaps all those homeless people in California should go round and “share” his home? Weather he wants them or not

  3. steve

    Moore is obviously obese, slovenly and stupid and maybe should start riding bikes himself. He sure is not riding one now.

  4. iam

    Remember when you used to be able to laugh these kinds of comments off as being rantings of loony people…and the MSM would support you? Yeah, times they are a’ changin’. If there’s one way I’d go along with these regressives is to go back to those days.

  5. Robert Christopher

    Michael Moore is to change his name to Michael Not-as-much-as-before.

    1. bonbon

      Michael Moore-is-less ! Or a bad case of Moresles ?

  6. RickWill

    By 2100 most countries will be facing underpopulation. The reason it is a problem is the skewed demographic profile as the low birth rate works its way through a population.

    This presentation provides some interesting insight to recent changes in fertility rate:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSAgHvETNSg
    It shows the UN predictions to be well beyond reality. In fact, these demographers consider the possibility that global population is already in decline or will be within the next decade.

    1. John F. Hultquist

      Rick,
      That stuff was wrong yesterday, and it is still wrong today.
      Perhaps try a refresher in demographics before posting this again.
      Thanks.

      1. John F. Hultquist

        Sorry, previous was on NTZ of April 22.
        Comments and links there.

      2. RickWill

        You have not listened to what these demographers have done. They are not predicting the population on the current global fertility rate of 2.5. It is rather based on extensive interviews they have undertaken with young women around the globe.

        The fertility rate could already be below 2.1; that needed for stable population. In that case the only thing contributing to population growth is average age increasing.

        Taiwan is the most wealthy nation on the planet in per capita terms. They have a fertility rate of 1. Wealthy woman have never been inclined to be breeding cows. The experience of one birth is often enough; sometimes not even being contemplated. As woman become wealthy, they choose not to have broods. As a result, Taiwan has a rapidly ageing population with life expectancy still rising beyond 80 years.

        Japan is wealthy in both absolute and per capita. Japan has a fertility rate of 1.4.

  7. Franz Dullaart

    Oh the hypocrisy! Telling everyone else what to do but doing the opposite themselves.

  8. Jacques Lemiere

    notice…

    let s share other people things..

    a lot a people say they are basically collectivists…but you notice one thing , few live actually in a little collectivist society.. they COULD… once they give us example of collectivist societies living in harmony ..we will choose or not follow their exemple…

    but always ask them why don’t you do what you say right now.. why do you want to force other people to do it???

  9. Mervyn

    These idiots are malthusians. People like them have been going on about population control for decades. How ironic their regular warnings and dire predictions about running out of natural resources and running out of food, if population growth isn’t brought under control, never eventuate.

    The problem with such people is they have no faith in anything except doom and gloom. They are forever pessimists. And it is people like them who are dangerous because they would actually dare risk ‘one world government’ totalitarianism-communism in the belief it would make for a better world. They are actually mad.

  10. mwhite

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LyzBoHo5EI

    Why global population won’t top 11 billion?

  11. Jim

    They are calling for a socialistic, not communistic governce. There is a difference. Even in the us of a we have a limited communistic/ monarchistic government. The Uber over the masses. Those who get listened to, over those who get ignored. And there is no middle path. The you, common people, have no chance, to enter the ” hallowed” walls. Or to be educated to join or have an opinion other then follow that hog. But, finally, the food experiments started in the 1920′ s are working. The lower birthrate, was proposed as a limiting of family choices, by modifying the crops, worldwide, now, it’s in all your foodstuffs, and it’s harder to find ” non” foods, so it’s not a choice, of the people, but of the few. Imposed on the many. So sad.

  12. Mike

    There is no sense in calling these people idiots or anything else. They are smart people with particular world view that they wish to promote.

    One of the interviewees said he had never been asked if he was scared before, he said he is, and that he has sleepless nights because of it. Was it the population thing, the energy thing, or was it the climate thing? – I don’t remember but it shows high anxiety in these people because they believe strongly in their view. Ultimately though, this is all rooted in the belief that humans are a mere animals, an out of control invasive creature, a soulless creature, an expendable creature. I suspect that many who comment here view humankind in the same way.

  13. Dennisa

    https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/what-is-michael-moore.html/

    “Not all documentary filmmakers are wildly successful, but Moore is the glaring exception. Less renegade indie filmmaker and more big-time Hollywood director, Michael Moore is worth around $50 million.

    He divorced his wife of 22 years, Kathleen Glynn, in 2014. The couple had shared a 10,000 square foot home in the tourist town of Torch Lake, Michigan. They also owned eight other residences including a sprawling Manhattan condo that used to be split into three different apartments.”

  14. DocSiders

    I have a few items on my “Abolition” list too.

    Regrettably, there are s few groups of humans included. Those that want me dead or that want to strip Americans of hard won freedom are at the top of my list.

    I’m locked and loaded, just waiting for them to declare war on us. We won’t lose.

  15. bonbon

    What is not good, is the very Church based on Genesis, “go forth and multiply”, seems to has a Pope squatting in the Holy See, calling for youth to revolt against science, on the same day as F4F’s virtual protest . Greta with PIK’s Rockstrom along with UN’s Guterres link COVID to “environment”.
    The carrier of this Malthusian disease, however not Patient Zero, is Dr. John Schellnhuber, KBE, dubbed personally in the Berlin Embassy in 2004, by Her Majesty herself, Queen Elizabeth. He is author of the Pope’s “Laudato Si”, a paean to Gaia, and founder of Rockstrom’s Potsdam Institute.
    The Royal Consort Philip, is well known to wish reincarnation as a deadly virus to “do something about the population”.

    Are any of of the above “Communists”?

  16. salah bela

    ello
    thanks for this amazing web site keep going

  17. ManicBeancounter (Kevin Marshall)

    The good thing about the film is that it works through the problems of renewables, rather than accepting the superficial prouncements emerging from Groupthink. They do not need to dig too deep into actual evidence to find cherished notions fall apart. It is based on unquestioned assumptions.
    However, over 200 years after Revd Thomas Malthus first published his erroneous ideas on population, Moore et al still believe the nonsense albeit in a regurgitated form. They still have a long way to go in understanding empirical reality. Then they would not be so pessimistic about the future.

  18. Gus

    ” >>> Moore uses the example of sharing bicycles, or even cameras. Everything can be shared. <<< "

    Sharing "everything" means sharing bugs, thus sharing diseases too. There are many reasons why at least here in the US we choose to live in separate stand alone homes and drive around in our own cars, which we do not like to share with other people, amongst them is disease transmission, but also resilience to, e.g., bombing, nuclear or conventional. The latter became apparent in the 1950s: it is much harder to deal a blow to a society in which population, transportation, and means of production are highly scattered.

    And then, there's also the simple matter of comfort. Would you be happy to have someone like Michael Moore live next door to you? How happy would you be to share the elevator with him?

  19. ahlam st

    It’s clear that Moore is stupid and maybe he should start cycling himself, and he probably doesn’t have at least one because of his over-obesity.

  20. tom0mason

    The underlying belief is that humans are apart from nature and not a part of nature. This is the gross error of all such arguments.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close