Al Gore
An Inconvenient Truth

Come on, this time I'll try to be serious, so I can make that ectoplasm nickghostdrakehoweverthenameiswritten happy with a shitty name. So, I watched the film mentioned above and more doubts than I had before arose, or better, doubts I didn’t have at all.

Let's start with a preamble. The ozone hole, who knows what happened to this damn hole, raise your hand. Is it still there, has it widened, has it closed, have they stitched it up? Yet, I remember making my mom stop using hairspray because of the hole. Now, years later, I've receded because of that hairspray and we're once again in an environmental emergency. The climate is changing, the planet is dying and blahblahblahblah: everyone is recycling, hitting their kids if they don't turn off the lights, and the wife if she does too much laundry, with newspapers and TV annoying us every day with news about polar penguins bathing in warm water.

The film: beautiful, no doubt about it, with him resembling a new Saint Francis going around the world spreading the new parable and casually sprinkling moving parts of his life: a sister who died of lung cancer and a father who immediately stopped growing tobacco. The "plot" of the film, based on the most credited (or spread) scientific theories, is what we all know: we produce and consume too much and poorly, we must change how we live or there is no future. But who produces the most junk? And here our Saint Francis really astonishes: WE, meaning Americans, are the major contributors to what’s happening. Damn, I say, but how? I pause, reflect. And this man is still alive after what he said? I mean, a man who was vice president to one of the most beloved presidents, a losing candidate due to manifestly rigged elections and thus a victim of Bush the world-destroyer, a man with the aura of a saint and a victim goes around saying these things and the CIA, FBI, and Osama bim bum bam don’t take him out? Not only that, the film, produced not in a garage but by a Hollywood major, even wins two Oscars? No way, dammit, something is not right here. And indeed: play.
Here’s the solution proposed by Saint Gore: I admit, we Yankees have been awful, but now, since there’s one Earth and there’s no point in quibbling over whose fault it is, we all need to fix things, because we are too many and growing too fast; in one generation the population will grow as much as in a thousand years of humanity, from 6 to 9 billion people. And the Earth cannot bear this. Put simply, who is the message directed to? Americans and Europeans with zero growth or someone else? And here’s the film's turning point: it shifts from an idea of CO2 hyperproduction to one of planet overpopulation, linking them without apparent connection and with a subversive message: you Chinese, Indians, and African fools are growing too much, and since AIDS and SARS epidemics and bird flu served little, we must aim to sterilize you with the environment. Translated: the Earth was fine until you started copulating too much and furthermore invading markets with your Chinese stuff; be careful because the Earth will not support you further, you need to reduce CO2 emissions, that is, you must produce less, everywhere convert crops to bioethanol production (so, less corn to eat, more corn for fuels, which is more valuable than SARS and AIDS put together) according to a protocol made in Japan (imagine how happy the Chinese are) and which we evil Americans have not yet signed (but what was he doing as vice president? Too busy cleaning the Lewinsky dress?).
They tell me that this regulating thought of peoples and demographies in dangerous growth is attributed to a certain Malthus, to whose theories Thatcher was very sensitive, and who knows who in the Windsor house, who were the same ones who had spread the ozone bull along with some American Jews like Rockefeller and similar people, that Rockefeller who you find in all the shadiest things, like the Bilderberg group (see Wikipedia). In short, this recycled Gore seems very nice to look at, charming when he speaks, but when you scratch the surface, the decay appears. I don’t know where the truth lies. It would, however, really piss me off if I’m doing the sorting of different waste and busting everyone's chops at the office with this climate change story only to find out it’s yet another American corporate scheme to continue dominating the world. Isn’t the IMF and the World Bank enough for them? Speaking of which, Argentina told the IMF to get lost, went bankrupt (I’m sorry for those who lost out, but they had to save their butts), but now it’s unpegged from the dollar and grows at 6% per year: why don’t we detach from the euro so the OECD-IMF-ECB et cetera look after their affairs and we give the reserve to those who really need it? Oh, no, I forgot we have Padoa Schioppa and Draghi who apparently have some dealings with those people and are likely on Goldman Sachs' payroll or similar. More than Luxuria, nicoghostdrake where are you? Oh, but they should say it clearly: we no longer have a dollar backed by physical wealth, it’s all trash paper, to last another 30 years we need a new huge financial bubble made of shares on CO2 emissions ("carbon trading” they call it), otherwise we’ll be suffocated by debts (see Texas, where people have mortgaged their homes to maintain the dazzling American lifestyle and are now on the street) and the Chinese, who boast billions in highly devalued dollars credits (if the dollar is worth less, the debt is worth less too) if they don’t do what we say we’ll exterminate them. Damn, but the new nuclear shield, who is it for? The penguins?

PS: At the recent Coldiretti forum, the largest agricultural union organization, they shared a survey showing that for Italians, the fight against pollution is more important than GDP growth. We are already in Saint Francis’s sack.