Thursday Green Colonialism Open Comments

This is from part 1 of 3 in Dr. Malone’s substack:

“Green Colonialism” is real and must be stopped.

Leaders from so-called developing nations have a different take on global climate change policies. Many state that they are being forced to use green energy, which is expensive and produces less energy per invested capital. This will make it even harder for billions of people to escape poverty. The term being used for these kinds of policies which are now being forced upon developing nations by the World Bank, WEF, and the usual globalist actors has become known as Green Colonialism.

I’ve heard this argument made – that the “green economies” will hamstring developing countries and retard their development into mature industrial societies.  Of course, those who impose this greening colonialism upon the third world countries will be able to retain some measure of economic and political control while thwarting the up-and-wannabe-comers.

International Public Policy Review, May 01, 2021 “Green colonialism… or the fight against climate change as an excuse for imperialism”

(Wealthy) countries now use the fight against climate change as a reason for pursuing imperialist activities. This has been designated as green colonialism. 

Nonetheless, the term ‘green colonialism’, just as ‘colonialism’, has been used to put a name on various phenomena. Daniel Butt defines colonialism as the combination of domination, cultural imposition and exploitation of one people by another (2013). Rearranging this definition, we restrict green colonialism to the domination, the cultural imposition and the exploitation of peoples by other peoples using environmental excuses…

Green colonialism, whether exercised consciously or unconsciously, is causing serious harm to indigenous populations as well as populations from the least developed countries. This issue is almost absent from the media, which can be explained by the difficulty the impacted populations have to raise awareness about their situation. It is therefore the most important fight to lead: make sure that their voices are heard so that policymakers listen to them. 

Financial institutions, multilateral development banks, UN/WEF, G 20 leaders, activists and wealthy nations are all putting political pressure to stop hydrocarbon projects in developing nations. They are only lending for “green energy solutions,” ergo: solar and wind energy sources. Despite the fact that hydrocarbon, and natural gas in particular, is significantly more economical, and can provide more energy services to more people than renewables alone.

/snip

Electricity is the key for “developing” nations (and their citizens) to get out of poverty. Energy frees people from poverty. Natural gas is the cleanest of all the fossil fuels. It is widely distributed, abundant and much cleaner than other hydrocarbon products. The article titled Natural Gas Should Be Part of the Discussion at Summit for a New Global Financing Pact By NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman, African Energy Chamber explains:

JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA / ACCESSWIRE / June 22, 2023 / Somewhere at the intersection of money and climate are more than 600 million Africans who don’t have access to electricity, 890 million Africans without methods for clean cooking, dozens of African nations that depend on hydrocarbons to fund just about every service they provide, and African industrial development that can’t move forward unless it’s powered by fossil fuels.

Yet this week, the politicians, banking experts, civil society group leaders, and others who are gathering at that intersection …are pushing an agenda that appears to be putting financing for African natural gas projects, the presumptive solution to many of the continent’s poverty woes, on the back burner, no pun intended.

The author describes how menial tasks like hand washing clothes and toting water are drains on the development of a society, and how electricity can remedy those issues and allow those citizens to spend their time on more productive endeavors.

Until a country can free its’ citizens of such labor, it can’t possibly compete with more developed nations. Solar and wind power will not get a nation below the poverty level to where it needs to be. Why should people in Africa suffer because of the idealistic climate change policies that have led to green colonialism?

In other words, “We have ours, so nertz to you!”  (To paraphrase Henry Blake.)

The African countries are outraged at this hindrance.  Author also points out that if green colonial countries would just get out of the way and allow those countries to develop their own hydrocarbon policies, they would be able to sustain themselves better and would also reduce the pressure for their citizens to seek lives elsewhere, away from the poverty.  Nuclear power is also touted as a solution to the energy poverty issue, instead of the green options which seem to be failing in Europe and America.  Parts of Europe are returning to nuclear as the cleanest and most optimal energy source.

You don’t say. /sarc off

The climate change initiatives which have been a failure worldwide continue to be pushed into developing nations – even as they have been shown to produce less energy for outrageous prices. These are solutions that, whether consciously or not, are designed to hurt the middle class and the poor. They are designed to keep developing nations economically challenged. This means that poor people will be the ones to suffer.

Green colonialism is real and must be stopped.

But what would be the virtue signaling look like then?