The Green Revolution that Spawned the Green Revolution.

The Trim Reaper.

As everything with a Green label is mindlessly supported, such as Robert Scribbler's acolyte devotion of Enron Musk (get a room, fer crissakes) that is so blind he considers EV production as Green, despite the ravages any car production wreaks via not only its manufacture, but the subsequent demands it places on not just resources, but the living environment itself, we might want to consider the ramifications of the first Green Revolution.

Making the obvious connection between the original Green Revolution and its outsize contribution to Climate Change has been as studiously avoided as the equally a parent (or two) connection between our border being overrun by unwanted children from Catholic countries where birth control is illegal and the fact that the first act of our POTbelliedUS was to sign an executive order reinstating the “Mexico City Policy” banning government funding of foreign pro-abortion groups like the International Planned Parenthood Federation. But just as forcing women to carry to term babies they can ill-afford to bear, begets the problem of their countries' economies not producing the requisite growth rate that such rapid babyfication would require, results in such an overabundance of mouths to feed that it necessitates their fleeing to somewhere that can (or at least that boasts it can) ... even if that country is Protestant, bypassing all the Catholic countries on its way, precisely because those other Catholic countries have the exact same problem: population so out of whack with the economic output of the nation that millions upon millions live in utter destitution, mankind's answer to which was to force the earth itself to overproduce by pouring fossil fuels into it, which is essentially what the so-called GREEN Revolution did, such that now every morsel that passes your lips requires ten calories of energy be burned in the form of fossil fuels so you can burn one calorie, was not only not green, it was so not green that it would be more appropriate if we were to call it the Black Revolution (but such a term would send shivers down the spine (if they had one) of the White Ruling Class), so large a contributing factor to it was Oil and its byproducts.

As the Democrats wonder why they have been reviled of late, could it be because their MSNBC mouthpieces are absolutely silent on these issues? For they have made neither the connection between the first Green Revolution spawning the current one nor the deliberate withholding of Planned Parenthood funding to the overproduction of offspring, it being perceived as being as much in their own self-interest as the President's to fan the flames of discontent into a red hot fever.

Has any of the hand-wringing and tears evolved into signs that read :

"Thank you @POTUS for reinstating the #MexicoCityPolicy! No more foreign aid for Int'l @PPact. This is only the beginning of #defundPP!"

That's what anti-abortion groups hailed the above-mentioned POTUS executive-order-signing with, and yet not a single article, MSM TV program, or politician has seen fit to throw this back in their collective faces, or place it on a placard next to children in cages, making the obvious connection between the Religious right's heartless support of this freakasaurus and the placing of children in detention camps and cages because, like it  or not, the world hasn't the resources to take care of the ongoing, but uncommented-on  second, and far louder, currently engineered Baby Boom. (Russia recently awarded a mother of ten (children, not years-old) a medal, personally signed by his majesty Tsar-Tsar the bore, Putin). And this Boom is working off a much larger base of 7 billion  people, not the mere 3.5 billion souls the 60's baby boom bloomed from.

Instead the Democrats seem to follow Paul Ryan's lead, as, like so many delinquent schoolboys, they cower before Trump as though he's also their leader; ashamed, put to confusion, unable to find their tongues, or their balls, bleating nary a protest to the new order of things where the statesman has disappeared, having been suborned by the politician; honesty , rectitude and integrity giving way to the devious maneuvering, the evil communication, the rotten expediency of a corrupted bankrupt. What can explain this silence from even our female representatives Nancy Pelosi and Senator Dianne Feinstein? (or even Maxine Waters, but she's lo IQ, so we have to give her a break).

When policies so ballyhooed by the POTUS bring such easily connected dramatic repercussions that necessitate the spending of additional billions in tax dollars to confiscate, house, and care for the offspring flowing over the border with the momentum of a river in spate, and all they can do is point out his heartless treatment of them yet never utter a single syllable about the well-known and Cheered policy of forcing these women to have babies they can't afford and then foisting the cost of these  Unaccompanied Children's  upbringing onto his MAGA morons, when the one language they have shown themselves quite capable of  understanding is the language of being Forced (as in the much-reviled Obamacare Forced payment of insurance premiums) into paying for something they haven't signed up for.

Yet have you, maybe I missed it, heard one peep from the the Left that might inform the Trump supporters they would prefer to dismiss as non-humans that their big great croMAGAman, who has kept his promise to deprive them of health insurance, has, as replacement, strapped onto their backs the far more onerous costs of warehousing and providing healthcare for, alien babies and adolescents, since doing so enriches his buddies who he pre-informed of his intentions, so that they had the necessary supplies and structures to sequester them in internment camps far from the border? Nope. Not Rachel's demographic. So she and her MSNBC cohorts haven't said a word. Too busy vilifying Russia, I guess. It plays well to their audience and most importantly, their sponsors.

And just as silent are they on the huge negative impacts that that first Green Revolution has had on the overall heating of the planet. Although sites such as Treehugger make such observations as: "Widespread industrial agricultural practices will continue to be terribly detrimental for the climate", they always fail to make the connection between what is now benignly referred to as industrial agriculture and the fact that it was called a Green Revolution when those practices were first implemented. Those practices are now responsible not only for the devastation to the natural environment so well documented in Rachel Carson's, The Silent Spring, but for the proliferation of Dead Zones in our oceans brought on by the washing off into our rivers and thence the seas of industrial fertilizers, those same fertilizers so extolled as contributing to the miracle of the Green Revolution, ironically living up to its name by turning the sea and many lakes and ponds green (albeit to a sickeningly ghastly green) with algal growth that chokes off the oxygen so completely as to make existence impossible for marine life.

The U.S. food system contributes nearly 20 percent of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions; on a global scale, figures from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), say that agricultural land use contributes 12 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. And those emission s are accumulative: 12% of our current CO2 atmospheric concentration of 410ppm is a good deal larger than the 12% of 250ppm they were previous to the industrial revolution.

But we must further consider some of the embodied energy required for industrial ag, so it gets worse. According to Will Allen, green farmer extraordinaire, when we include all the "manufacture and use of pesticides and fertilizers, fuel and oil for tractors, equipment, trucking and shipping, electricity for lighting, cooling, and heating, and emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and other green house gases" it bumps the impact up to between 25 and 30 percent of the U.S.'s collective carbon footprint. And that 's what we called a Green Revolution. Advancing a form of agriculture that changes the climate as much as all other forms of industrial production in the US combined. And that was before we started growing food to burn up as fuel for cars ... another concept hailed as Green.

And what all these processes that were collectively hailed as a Green Revolution have brought us is to this point where we can feed the world only by destroying it. And yet we allow ourselves to be moronically led by such 'visionaries' as Enron Musk, lauded by such 'journalists' as Robert Scribbler (who adopted this pseudonym in favor of his real name, Robert Fanny, so we wouldn't know what an ass he is), to usher in yet another Green Revolution, this one in energy! of all things, one that'll have even more dire effects than the first one, as we now have an additional 3.5 billion people on the planet that these two bimbos think can all have their own little personal EV's and that will, to marry a Rachel Madcow emphasis to a Paul Krugman inanity, "really really really,  'Save The Planet'".

Instead what it IS doing, following exactly the template laid down by the first Green Revolution, is exacerbating, only now in real time, the accumulation of CO2, with a heavy dose of methane to boot, in the atmosphere. By real time, I mean that in the sixties, seventies and eighties, the natural environment had yet to collapse into the dysfunctional state we've since driven it to, so that the CO2 could be absorbed and sequestered via the vast rainforests of Indochina, the Amazon, and even the boreal rainforests of the American Northwest. 

But that is no longer true. It is in fact, SO not true, that those regions have been so devastated as to be turned from net carbon sinks into net carbon emitters, all for the same reason: to make what they like to refer to as Renewables, as  in Green, fuels: biodiesel  manufactured by burning down rainforests to replace with palm oil plantations in Indochina, vast sugar plantations made by turning huge swaths of the Amazon rainforest to ash in order to make ethanol in Brazil, and devastating forest fires that funneled centuries-worth of sequestered carbon right into the Arctic, sparked by the horrendously dirty, energy-intensive, earth-scarring Canadian tar sands of the Athabasca region of Alberta. 

All this to power our EV's, the manufacture of which, as per the Scribbler, we are supposed to be delighted have jumped 75%. But this current Green Revolution is already having an even more devastating impact on world climate than the last one had. And this one leaves us with no options, as its advocates insist that they are Progressive. Never mind that it is precisely human progress that has brought us to this global calamity in the first place, making our individual lives oh so much better, but reaping a whirlwind that these so-called Progressives are in as much denial about as any of the Trump supporters they revile so sanctimoniously are in about Climate Change.

So the next time you hear someone refer to a  policy, process, or infrastructure as Green, you should be aware that the only green they mean is the color of the Dollars that run this Capitalist War Machine. For that is the entire reason for the monetization of everything under the sun: no tax dollars from the monetization of even wiping your ass (that TP ain't free), no way to support the vast military enterprise the United States of America has turned itself into, possibly resulting in the outcome the world fears most, as it has no means of handling it: a mass exodus from the States themselves.