Residential Collectivization

As any fule kno, Communism is all about taking away the individual and replacing him with a cipher that can be controlled and manipulated by a benevolent Big Brother.  Here’s one such manifestation, in the ravings of some Marxist college professor [redundancy alert]:

“If we want to keep cities safe in the face of climate change, we need to seriously question the ideal of private homeownership,” says Kian Goh, who researches urban ecological design, “spatial politics” and social mobilization “in the context of climate change and global urbanization.”

Proposed solutions, including a public takeover of Pacific Gas & Electric, are missing one of the most important factors in climate change-driven destruction, Goh warns: “economic development, aspirations of home ownership, and belief in the importance of private property.”
To prevent catastrophe, Americans must reconsider their ideas about “success, comfort, home, and family,” particularly the single-family homes that followed in the wake of the Homestead Act of 1862 and federally backed mortgage insurance, the professor argues.
These policies benefited white middle-class families and “became synonymous with freedom and self-sufficiency” even though they represented “[e]xpansionist, individualist, and exclusionary patterns of housing.”

So having a house in the ‘burbs is a factor in Glueball Climate We’re All Gonna DIEEEEE! Catastrophe.

As we all know, of course, this whole climate bullshit manifesto is just a fig leaf covering the true aims of people like this asshole academic — there is no climate catastrophe looming —  but it sure as hell allows them to create their little model society, doesn’t it?

What really, really  scrapes these Commie bastards is that home ownership is the end result of individualism, provides the individual a stake in the society in which he lives, and provides for private security in his abode.  Private property ownership also means that people will, in the main, resist any and all efforts of the State to confiscate or otherwise appropriate it — and for the Commies, remember, there is no private property because all property belongs to the State.

So yeah, they’d prefer to have us all live in tiny, State-managed apartments in an urban environment, using public instead of private transport, and working for the State rather than for ourselves.

Already, the eeeevil automobile has been blamed for the non-existent growth of carbon emissions which is going to melt ice caps etc.  Now pricks like this Goh creature can add suburban homes to the list of eco-evils, which means that they too can be circumscribed, reduced and ultimately, banned.

Feel free to dispute anything you’ve read so far in this post, but you’d better have something more than emotion, slogans and hysteria in your argument.

“Spatial politics”, my fat African-American ass.

11 comments

  1. The really funny thing is that morons like this Goh dweeb want us all to leave Suburbia and move into faceless high-rises in the city… The building of which will only serve to exacerbate the *URBAN* heat island effect, of which climate change fanatics ignore the very real effects in localized temperature increases, in order to focus on the non-existent supposed effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    The very thing they demand we have to do to *SAVE THE PLANET!!!!11!1!eleventy!* will lead to far more destruction than they could ever dream of.

  2. Is there any plan to fight Global Warmening that doesn’t involve me handing over large amounts of cash and personal property to cronies of the politicians?

    1. no. THat’s the entire point of the global warming, cooling, climate change whack jobs. Most of these “environmentalists” are really Watermelons, Green environmentalists on the outside and Red Communists on the inside. Screw ’em.

      Keep our land generally clean (waste in centralized areas), rivers and waterways clean but stop deluding folks that wind and solar are the great saviors. Oil, gas and coal all have their appropriate places as does nuclear power. Drill, baby drill and build those power plants!

      JQ

  3. My local environmental group asked for comments on their draft report showing how our leafy suburb was bad for the environment because we lived in larger houses and drove more miles than the ” average Massachusetts citizen” ( and made more $, owned more land and was better educated ….. so extra bad ) . I pointed out they forgot to include that we also owned more than enough trees to cancel out our carbon footprint and produce needed oxygen. …. and I used Sierra Club/ Nature Conservancy numbers to back up the claims.

    They couldn’t come up with a counter argument so just chose to pretend I didn’t exist and published their report without acknowledging my public comments

Leave a Reply