What's some gud ecof*scist literature?

Sorry for not sorry but the enviroment moves by the science, not your feeling.

strange that you can both be wrong at the same time

>nature moves by science
>wrong
Movement of nature is the definition of science

How do you plan on regulating environmental controls without having an extensive level of directed control over both corporate organizations and the private lives and habits of citizens, my science dude

prove me wrong

let's test that hypothesis, eh?
how does oxford living dictionary define science?
>The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
without some generous interpretation, it doesn't seem like your definition fits with this one. if i am to believe you, then you're going to have to provide a more plausible defense than an appeal to your own authority.

if by fascism you merely mean merely an 'extensive level of directed control over both corporate organizations and the private lives and habits of citizens' then basically every government on the planet is already fascist. if so, there does not seem to be any inherent connection between fascism and the preservation of the environment, as it was in the custody of these same fascist governments that the environment has suffered the degradation that it has.

If you think that modern-day america has the same level of outright, direct control over the lives and actions of its citizens, or - even more laughably - that of its corporations as that of, say, Nazi Germany or even non-fascist totalitarian states like the USSR then I literally don't know what to tell you dude, you're delusional

It's no coincidence that increasingly fascist states had directly proportionally more dramatic environmental protections, far more of a concern than they were in capitalist and communist states

>plan on
You don't. Actually, you can't. It is about WHO survives longer in the game of fact, not which games one can choose. If you want to survive longer than this, be smart. Learn the game's rule:science.

china.

>lol just don't bother protecting the environment at all, someone will probably survive anyway because of science or something haha

Alright, you're just a retard then

totalitarian /=/ fascist, fascism requires specifically intense tribalism and naturalism that demand environmentalism through their logical application, hence "non-fascist totalitarian states like the ussr". fascism does require totalitarianism and you do need totalitarianism (which democratic systems do not have) to be environmentalist, but totalitarianism itself does not entail fascism

why dont ecofascists just live in thier jungle/ethnova hut/banana village or whatever already
there are already large forums dedicated to being hobos/living off the land, it's totally possible even in this day and age, but the ecofascists choise to sit around all day on Twitter instead

can you give me historical examples of ecological conservation or renewal projects that were undertaken by fascist governments?

>Check your privilege
My authority? In an anonymous board? As an anonymous?
.
.
.
.
Regulating....
.
.
.
99%
complete

Well, at least I have a freedom of speech to say, right? Anyway facts doesn't move by your argument, not even my anonymous """"authority"""" boogeyman. Seems like your cards might works well in your safeplace but not here.

Please feel free to describe what metrics you have used to come to this conclusion.

I'll Just create a metric now - the right of the individual to be selective in their hiring of staff for their business for whatever reason they team fit. Hmm... looks like Nazi Germany wins...

Why don't people who lobby governments or vote just shut up and do what I want?

can't tell if this is an act or not so--you win, i guess

Because sitting in a hut while people are actively destroying the environment around you is worse than cowardly, it's outright hypocritical

It's pretty common knowledge that nazi germany and italy launched extensive environmental preservation campaigns; the 1935 land preservation laws are probably the most famous example of these but you can look up countless examples online of animal rights extensions, land preservation, natural propaganda, etc.

I'm not going to sit here and argue how nazi germany was more totalitarian than modern-day america because either you agree with the very, very obvious premise that a dedicated totalitarian state was more totalitarian than a dedicated market republic and are just wasting everyone's time or you are utterly insane

Because, uh, the time is linear, so you no matter how immediately move to some other country, you can't change your past? Even a single second after you born?
I'd rather live where I BORN instead of where I want. Maybe this sounds too radical nowdays.

they're the ones that seem to want this Ted k style life at least from what i can tell
they're just pussies however so they wont go innawoods

>It's pretty common knowledge that nazi germany and italy launched extensive environmental preservation campaigns; the 1935 land preservation laws are probably the most famous example of these but you can look up countless examples online of animal rights extensions, land preservation, natural propaganda, etc.
why don't you link me, bb? i would think you'd have all the resources bookmarked, this being a subject of such personal interest to you, and not just a big hollow tub you like to thump.

>I'm not going to argue, just accept labels at face value and stop thinking
Absolutely based and intelligentpilled

>i get knocked down, but i get up again

Attached: 1535414724598.gif (240x287, 276K)

Why would you assume that I have online resources documenting these bookmarked and on hand, that was a silly assumption to make and I regret to inform you that I do not but you can google 'wwii fascist environmentalism' and get a few hundred websites talking about environmental policy in germany and italy if you want online stuff, the eco part has always been a core part of organized fascism and it was a major part of their rhetoric and policy

If your thought is "Hmmm, what if the state with a dedicated totalitarian ideology that strives to specifically control and perfect all aspects within the state was actually less totalitarian than a state dedicated to individual liberties that tries very hard to not infringe upon personal choice as much as possible" then you should stop thinking because you're a moron

I strongly suspect you agree with the idea that nazi germany was in fact more totalitarian than the USA and are just being a le hilarious troll though

How can someone as stupid as you be so smug?

I'll leave you with this though.
>Unabomber manifesto point #95

I apologize if I come off smug to you but if you genuinely believe that because the US and other western democracies have a level of subtle influence over media and pop culture that they are more totalitarian than a state which directly demands and actively enforces a code of ethics and way of living onto its populace you are either delusional or idiotic

i don't feel like worrying the point to much
but now how is environmentalism inherently fascist? why must there be a component of, as you say, 'intense tribalism'?

Environmentalism doesn't have to be fascistic, there are anarchists that go and live by themselves or people who live in communes and produce absolutely nothing, just living to survive and die.

But this has no affect on anything and every single environmental group understands this, and believes that the consumer and business cannot be convinced to do the right thing and instead requires government force and coercion to forward this political/social agenda. Government force used to dictate social and economic policies with a hand in every business and the power to go food to door and force you to throw your trash in the correct bin. This is fascism.

Ecofascists takes this logic a step further and realizes that every single modern environmental organisation ignores the actual root of problems. These environmental organizations are more focused on gender equality and multiculturalism than environmentalism. They want to sacrifice their own economies with replacements of renewable, sustainable energy without imposing these rules on the "oppressed" foreign nations due to a phobia of white imperialism. They're trendy people who want to take pictures of themselves holding crayon cardboard planets and blame some faceless, rich, white, male stereotype for their own consumerist greed. Then, they go out and demand more open borders, less nuclear energy, more multiracialism, nonsense that, at best, solves nothing.

If you expect humans to live in harmony with nature and the natural world to any serious extent, how can they possibly not live in small, collected, natural groups? Tribalism is the natural state of mankind and it is the only feasible and reasonable way that man could live at peace with nature instead of attempting to change and control it

the refusal of fascists to recognize that its the market itself which demands environmental destruction is the single fatal blow to their environmentalism.
You're basically just paying lip service to green energy, while ignoring the constant need for deforestation, market expansion (and so increased energy needs), destructive practises and all these things done in the name of profit, which you either don't plan to stop, or have a very contradictory poorly thought out plan to.
You're spot on about the need for authoritarianism in order to achieve ecological balance though. A central world government is essential.

That one is quite unoriginal I heard

Cuba is an esoteric national bolshevist state based on santeria

Attached: fidel-virgendelacaridad.jpg (500x374, 49K)

FUCK AGRICULTURE

Attached: 9780231177528.jpg (350x517, 64K)