By Katie Spence
The first political party to have a renewable energy program was the Nazi party in the 1933 Reichstag elections. Their goal was to transition to wind power, and use the wind to produce hydrogen, according to Rupert Darwall, a senior fellow at RealClearFoundation.
The catalyst for this energy revolution in the Nazi party was an “us versus them” mentality and was a fundamental reaction against the “original sin of the Industrial Revolution.” A revolution that significantly increased living standards for humanity and was made possible by coal, Darwall told Paul Greaney of NTD, a sister media outlet of The Epoch Times, in an interview.
But when the Nazi party fell, the Nazi and Neo-Nazi environmental leaders had to find new ways to further their “energy revolution.” Thus, they assumed leadership positions in an up-and-coming environmentalist party in Germany and joined in protesting nuclear energy during the Cold War.
That party later officially became Germany’s Green Party in 1980, which led to the “greening of Germany,” the eventual “greening of Europe,” and is based not on science, but on “insane green ideology” and control, Darwall claimed.
False Catastrophes and Control
In the interview, which aired on NTD’s Fresh Look America on Oct. 12, Darwall, who’s also a policy expert, explained the underlying factors in the global push to reach Net Zero by 2050.
Unlike what people have been led to believe, Darwall stated, the transition towards renewable energy—generally understood as energy derived from sources such as the sun or wind that replenish faster than they’re used—is not based on science but is instead rooted in Nazi environmentalism where the present needs to be “sacrificed for the sake of some better future. A purer, cleaner, greener future.”
It’s also about the elites controlling the population. A control they tried to accomplish through communism and socialism but have so far failed to realize fully.
Darwall specified that in their efforts to gain control and force the populace to bow to their energy whims, environmentalists invented “imaginary catastrophes” as propaganda tools to stop debate. He added that much of what people see today concerning claims to climate catastrophes involve two things: climate tipping points and a 1988 climate conference in Toronto, Canada, where those in attendance falsely claimed that “climate change will be second only to a global nuclear war.”
According to Darwall, one of the “climate tipping points” was the melting of Greenland’s ice sheet, a claim made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC. However, Darwall points out that in the IPCC’s own assessment report, Greenland’s ice sheet melting “irrecoverably” only occurred under sustained warming of higher temperatures. And even in those circumstances, the Greenland ice sheet melted over “multiple millennia.”
Concerning extreme weather events akin to “global nuclear war,” Darwall says, “we’ve had how many years since 1988? Over three decades. Can anyone really say, hand on heart, you’ve seen anything approaching a global nuclear war in terms of extreme weather? Because climate change is manifested in extreme weather. There’s nothing that remotely justifies such a claim.”
Still, using terms such as “catastrophe” has worked to further green ideology and facilitated the forced reorganizing of society by environmentalists. Darwall points out that IPCC’s 2015 report essentially says Net Zero offers the opportunity for societal transformation. A transformation made possible by giving climate activists control of energy policy to decarbonize and avert catastrophe.
Real Energy Crisis
In their desire to avoid imaginary catastrophes by implementing a “completely insane energy policy,” Darwall said environmentalists led the world into an actual catastrophe in the emerging and quickly worsening energy crisis.
“[In the 1970s] the higher price of oil stimulated more investment in oil production. And the result was that by the mid 1980s, the price had come down to what it had been before the Iranian Revolution. That won’t happen this time because the whole point is to suppress production of oil and gas. So that’s why this time is fundamentally different.”
Because he’s committed to “green ideology,” Darwall added, President Biden isn’t willing to increase domestic production. But because of “voter blowback from higher gasoline prices,” Biden made overtures to OPEC+ to bring the price down “temporarily.”
Darwall also said that while the United States is experiencing high gas prices, it isn’t in the same pickle as Europe because Congress has yet to pass a law requiring the United States to achieve Net Zero. Europe, being much further along in its renewable energy transition, has increased its reliance on wind, solar, and, irrationally, Russian oil and gas imports.
Darwall further claimed that those in control in Europe are OK with higher energy costs as they’re fully committed to fundamentally changing society and purposefully reducing the standard and quality of life in their push to “deindustrialize Europe.”
“Net zero fundamentally changes our way of life. That is the whole point of it. For environmentalism, the modern consumer society of mass consumerism, of consumption of materials, and so forth, is bad. … They actually want to change that. So, of course it involves a big reduction in people’s standard of living, a big change in their quality of life.”
What environmentalists didn’t expect, though, was a conflict between Ukraine and Russia that exacerbated the energy crisis to the point where Europe is facing a winter of high energy prices, potential blackouts, and a complete shutdown of the economy due to a lack of energy.
Still, Darwall pointed out that while a rational society might pause and evaluate its policies, no such evaluation is taking place. Instead, the opposite is happening, and Europe has accelerated its renewable energy transition by closing nuclear power stations. “The German government is closing its last three, even despite the energy crisis. Belgium is shutting one down.”
That “green irrationalism,” Darwall alleged, is a direct result of the Green Party’s influence and, by way of Nazis originally leading the Green Party, by Nazi philosophy and their willingness to engage in complete control and tyranny—elements still at play today.
“If you’re going to force people to live a low carbon existence, it requires a degree of control, state control over people, what people do and how they live their lives,” Darwall added.