It doesn’t seem to make much difference whether a man inherits his money or earns it. Once he reaches a certain threshold of the green stuff, there’s a good chance he will begin to equate his own intelligence with the level of his wealth.
He says to himself that only a true genius could have this much money, an attitude which is a special form of madness. The dumber, and richer, he is the more likely he is to fall prey to this fallacy.
The reason is the rich man is surrounded by supplicants. Greedy leeches schooled in the art of flattery. Even ordinary people, not rapacious themselves, are overawed by stacks of cash and become prone to babbling meaningless compliments. They always have a distant hope some of that gold will shine on them.
Stupid people, rich or no, are more likely to accept these endless and earnest praises. Surrounded by incessant praise, they come to believe it.
Enter John Kerry, who, by marriage, got his money. But we needn’t hold this union against him. Because he could just as well have earned it himself and come to the same idiotic end.
No other theory beyond the one I advanced adequately explains his theory that to “save the planet” we need to shut down farms.
Yes, he did too say so.
And he said it sitting next to another man who resisted Epictetus’s admonition to reject flattery, computer software salesman Bill Gates.
Kerry, Biden’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, issued the warning during a green agenda conference in Washington D.C.
During the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) AIM for Climate Summit, Kerry told the audience that “we can’t get to net zero, we won’t get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution.”
Kerry warned attendees that his and other world leaders’ “lives depend” on farmers ceasing their operations.
Stopping farmers from growing food will lower agriculture “emissions,” Kerry insists.
Net zero is the lunatic idea that some bureaucrat’s measure of “carbon”—the midwits means carbon dioxide, but can’t bring themselves to say it, it sounds so nonsensical—will balance out in some Expert model they create for themselves. You don’t get to see what goes into these models, but must trust the Experts when the magical condition of “net zero” has been met.
Now Kerry is right about one thing. Stopping people from farming will indeed stop their “emissions”. If by “emissions” he means breathing. Because once farmers stop farming, the food stops. And once the food stops, breathing stops. And once breathing stops, emissions stop.
And once emissions stop, the nirvana of “net zero” will have been reached.
I realize that this sounds stupid, and I am embarrassed to have to write it. My having to explain that it is food that keeps people alive means we have regressed in science to a point even before Neanderthal man’s contributions. Still, that is where we are.
What in the unholy Hell else could “lives depend” on stopping farming mean?
Kerry went on to say, with Gates drooling his agreement, that “the world’s population must slash meat consumption.” Which will be simplicity itself, once farms are shut down.
But, now I think on it, I might have to explain to those Experts reading this that, believe it or not, animal meat comes from farms and not the grocery store.
In practice, Kerry’s plan is like the Dutch government’s. They are using “nitrogen” to fret about in the Netherlands and not “carbon.” A matter of taste, I guess. The end result is the same.
The government will shut down little- and mid-guy farms, while allowing mega-corporation donors—I mean farm owners—to keep running. Meaning Kerry, and Gates, are calling for a New & Improved! scientific method of collectivisation. Only instead of direct government ownership of farms, oligarchs will own them. The price they pay will be having Experts produce the regulations that govern them.
Could it be a coincidence Gates has been buying up farmland?
“That’s poor writing, Briggs. It is a coincidence. You want to ask what it means.”
You’re right. The better thing to ask is, is Gates a raving madman, or is he merely greedy?
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.
I suggest a simple experiment for Mr. & Mrs. (HienzJ Kerry. Immediately shut down all tomato production for any and all farms supplying tomatoes to Kraft-Hienz.
We’ll wait for Mr. Kerry to get back to us.
“The better thing to ask is, is Gates a raving madman, or is he merely greedy?”. Raving, *insane* greedy madman
they are all madmen, as well as being greedy! philanthropists all (credit to Margaret And Alice for that term).
wait! philanthropaths! spell check keeps ‘correcting’ me!
> Meaning Kerry, and Gates, are calling for a New & Improved! scientific method of collectivisation. Only instead of direct government ownership of farms, oligarchs will own them.
This is actually the way fascists did it back in the 30’s. This is not “socialism”, this is fascism. I’m not being hyperbolic or metaphorical. This is *the* way they did it. Now it takes more than that to create fascism, but complete surrender of the nation to capital is an essential feature. Another essential feature is so-called corporatism which in this case means organising society into “corpuses” (corporations), groups according to certain features like vocation. Think “guilds” except spaning the entire nation and not individual cities. And then the communication and decision making happens between corpuses. Now, some countries like Croatia seem to have already implemented this but I’m not sure about others. Perhaps “lobbying” and all that entails are a de facto way of implementing corporatism.
This is the line of thought that led me to realize — -“Umh, yo, protesters, climate enthusiasts, whatever you want to call yourself, if you take away ALL of the ways I have at hand to easily cook my food, heat my house and get me places, I WILL USE MORE sinister means.. I will start turning trees in to charcoal. I will start stacking cords of wood. I will start clearing trees around my house to make it possible to grow food. ”
Energy balances. How much energy goes in vs how much comes out. They are not that hard to understand. There is math involved.
If money flows into anything and transformed energy is not part of the output (cough, carbon …. cough…. credits… cough), and we think this is a GOOD… That is not a good thing. That is fawning over the idyllic goat.
If I remember correctly, someone set a group to wander in the desert because of that type of behavior.
Briggs:
Money-power devil-god makes men crazy-evil.
Senator Ketchup:
Commercial greenhouses are growing huge crops of tomatoes in warm air supplemented by carbon dioxide gas.
It’s got nothing to do with saving the planet. It’s the same old end goal of severely eliminating human life, and putting the suitable modeled number of surviving serfs under as much control as their models of technology are told to say they can handle while they lord over you.
The planet is the excuse, because they think >>>you<<< care about the planet and want you to voluntarily kill yourself to help them out. If you fall for it, you deserve to die starving for your carbon sins.
Not only do they imagine themselves to be geniuses, but guys like Kerry and Gates don’t even realize they’d most likely be superannuated virgins if it weren’t for their wealth.
These two, along with others like Soros, are real-life Bond villains. If only a James Bond would arrive in time to neutralize them before their World Domination scheme could be achieved.
Briggs,
Ah, you believe the title (from the quoting link)!
And people believe you.
Kerry and Gates are no different from you in that they think they have a voice and can get people to listen to them. Regardless of what you think, Bill Gates is not stupid.
Well, net-zero farming will require intelligence, both human and artificial intelligence.
If your movement requires deferring to “artificial intelligence” then you’ve already lost. You might as well throw darts at a dart board to determine next move; it’s easier, cheaper and a LOT more environmentally friendly.
JH, potato/potahto.
Food production will be reduced as a direct consequence of ceasing to use the things needed to grow it. Aka farmers must stop growing food, also meaning some farmers will go under due to severely reduced profit margins, and government needs those taxes for social programs baby! Sonow all the food stops. Then Government requisitions the land and sells it to Gates so they can have the budget to update all the old outdated rainbow flags. Kerry knows this. The Dutch government knows it. The farmers know it better than anyone – They are EXPERTS! Not the jackass programing AI to construct pretty pictures of food charts assembled from libraries it was trained on.
Now do us a favor; stop eating, and send your food to Briggs. It was all Uber Eats anyway.
In the worlds of the old sci-fi writers like Heinlein, Asimov, and H. Beam Piper, we expected government to be corrupt and inept, but there was a fundamental belief that it existed to serve the common good. Clearly, this is no longer the case.
I think our leaders really are evil gray aliens, and that is the reason they talk about reducing carbon because we are carbon based life forms, and they want to reduce us to zero.
Whoa … “Philanthropath”? Wow, that just made my top-ten list of my all-time favorite portmanteaus.
ChatGPT just gave me a list of 49 US states with explicit “right to farm” laws, which might throw a monkey wrench into the plans of the John Effing Kerry ilk. SCOTUS seems likely to be another roadblock. Clearly what is needed is a constitutional amendment giving the federal government the power to regulate the production and distribution of farm products. While constitutional amendments are notoriously difficult to get enacted, history provides a successful precedent for them to copy, the 18th Amendment, which was passed in Congress by wide margins, and quickly ratified by the states two years later.
Some Jewish historians (The Pale of Settlement Regions) have linked money-lending practices long associated with Jews to Czarist restrictions on performing farming work during Christian Holy Days ~ consequently “forcing” Jewish landholders into taking up usury as an alternate source of income. Others view this historiographic interpretation as simply a cope.
Rudolph Harrier and Johnno, Ms. Google would like to teach you about “AI in Agriculture”. I promise that she would not be mad at you. Go and ask her.
No thanks JH. Open your mouth and tell us in your own words why the above story and the below story are a good thing. Stop outsourcing your brain to Google and making us do your lazy thinking for you. If I wanted to argue with an AI, I can, and I’d win because like you, it’s only a matter of time until it refuses to answer least it run afoul of the parameters its woke programmers set for it and apologizes to me profusely, or simply ends up agreeing with me based on what I tell it to say, based on how I tell it to operate, or it simply shuts up, requiring a reboot.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/02/irelands-mooted-cow-massacre-warning-to-net-zero-britain/
Has Kerry ever exhibited any talents except marrying rich women?
Pingback: There will always be cake, right? | The zombie apocalypse survival homestead
See Sri Lanka.
Meanwhile in South Africa – Race quotas for water!
Guess who is in last place, and also happens to run the farms and livestock!
https://moonbattery.com/antiwhite-discrimination-applied-to-access-to-water/
Pingback: TVESDAY MORNING EDITION – Big Pulpit
The root of all green-“think” is the dogma, that “Humans are a cancer of the earth”. That’s why they are never going to stop until we finally stop them. German government now seamlessly equals CO2 production to energy usage. The less energy we use the better for the planet. And water has become so valuable that farmer’s access to water must be restricted. All by law.
The issue is sustainable farming. Cattle produce almost 10% of emissions contributing to global warming – a phenomenon the acceleration of extreme weather occurrences continually proves. Nudging consumer behavior towards food choices friendlier to the planet will mean fewer forest fires, hurricanes, extreme floods, tornados and other natural disasters that are becoming almost daily realities.