…and women. Thoughts from Iowahawk about the ecofascists.
[Afternoon update]
We’ve reached the point in this cycle of humanity to where if you aren’t part of Groupthink, you are to be eliminated.
Fortunately, their fantasy red button doesn’t exist, and the folks with the guns will keep them from getting it, at least here.
[Sunday morning update]
The inevitable remix.
[Bumped]
[Reprinted from comment #39 in the earlier thread, where it likely will never be read …]
This is a wonderful video!
It portrays hard-core environmentalists — and by extension, the British government — as conscienceless murderers, fully capable of lying to the public with a straight face and then casually executing anyone who has even the most trivial objections to their plans. The underlying message is that the bureaucrats pushing 10:10 are a bunch of cheerfully deluded sociopaths who kill without remorse.
What’s not to like?
The amazing thing is how deeply the doublespeak has set in. The group is named “No pressure.” The denotation of ‘no pressure’ and the connotation of “Random peers will blow you the hell up if you don’t submit immediately – and sufficiently” are diametrically opposed. More Animal Farm.
A commenter at Belmont Club made an excellent point: Instead of inventing a magic red button that kills dissenters, why didn’t the makers of the video simply invent a magic green button that would heal the planet without killing anybody?
Answer: It’s not about the environment. It’s about the red button.
The counterpoint movie is now being made. A Greenie says, “No pressure” — and before he can touch the button, five people draw and fire guns, blowing his head apart like a rotten pumpkin.
Of course, folks like Bob-1 shouldn’t let it get them upset; it’s a inept but well-meant attempt to point out what seen as wrong with the modern environmental movement.
First off, I would like to extend an invitation to Jim or Chris or anyone to give us the correct context or explanation.
Secondly, I am not, not going to watch this odious and wretched piece-of-filth video, even if it is to edify myself on what the eco-fascists are up to, so someone is going to have to tell me about it in words.
Thirdly, not having seen the video, I would like to offer a conjecture of what is in it and what the intended message was supposed to be.
The 10:10 Society wants everyone to “reduce their carbon footprint” (oooh, how I despise this use of the word “footprint.” We are such an interconnected and interdependent World that anyone can determine what any one person’s “footprint” on the environment even is, that they may take smug satisfaction in being better than their neighbors, is absurd).
I think the message is one of “we can do this the easy way” (that is participating in the 10:10 Society’s “pledge” — again, I just hate, hate, hate these environmental pledges, if a person had any interest in money, one would be doing all of the pledgable things already, and if the pledgable things don’t save money, they probably increase a person’s footprint (ooooh, that word again!) indirectly).
Or “we can do this the hard way”, namely to execute every 10’th person randomly and arbitrarily and bloodily.
Someone who had the stomach to watch the video can correct me on this (Chris, Jim, care to comment on this one?). If I understand the intent of the 10:10 Society correctly is that the executions are not targeted at anti-environmentalists. Rather, the executions are non-targeted and random, and they are “the fault” of the deniers and anti-environmentalists who have prevented us from “doing this the easy way” of participating in some simple conservation measures.
Hence, in the absence of the conservation measures, and not being able to meet the 10% reduction-in-emissions target set by our social betters, the 10% reduction will be met the “hard way”, i.e., by the random executions.
You see, the random executions are really a metaphor for the tribulation times brought on by the environmental damage from failing to protect the environment in the prescribed and proscribed manner. Kinda like if “the warming” only hurt polar bears, hard to get enough people to feel sorry for polar bears, but if it blew up school kids, people would be more earnest about the 10:10 plan.
Of course I am going to be hung out to dry even guessing at a plausbile explanation of this ghastly thing — Jim, Chris, I need your help here!
You beat me to it! Yes, that’s exactly the reaction I had after reading your first paragraph.
By the way, I think the problem with the 10:10 movement is that it doesn’t focus on changing market demand and manufacturing instead of changing behavior. Consumers should demand products which are better for the environment without making lifestyle compromises. Engineering is about tradeoffs, but in this case, we can engineer smarter solutions. My new car is bigger and safer and more fun to drive than my old car yet it gets much better real-world gas milage. I’m going to drive just as much as ever, but I’ll enjoy the better mpg.
That was for Akatsukami.
Personally, I’d like to see a parody made of that commercial wherein one of the students, knowing their fate, stands on top of their desk and gives a Braveheart-esque speech about freedom.
Paul Milenkovic, no they’re targeted. There’s a request for “voluntary compliance” for some tidbit of Gaianism. Anyone who doesn’t quite buy into it is told “That’s no problem, completely voluntary, No Pressure…” Then blown the hell up by the authority figure who is holding a little red button.
The last scene has a spokeswoman for the movement blown up in a radio booth because she felt that her contribution (doing radio spots for the movement) was sufficient.
Paul Milenkovic:
No, it’s more direct and brutal than your guess. The red button doesn’t kill at random; it targets only people who won’t get with the program. The victims don’t even argue against it or get belligerent; they just don’t give a flip, and want to be left alone.
Engineering is about tradeoffs, but in this case, we can engineer smarter solutions.
I’m skeptical you know anything about engineering. If I’m wrong, what type of button would you suggest?
My new car (a Subaru Outback) has a CVT which improves the mpg while making the ride more enjoyable too (my opinion). The new Honda Odyssey, a notable gas guzzler in years past (sometimes it gets much worse real life milage than the EPA estimate), gets much better gas milage than last year’s model, due to aerodynamics (Honda says it isn’t due to a new transmission).
Slightly disturbing is the “apology” from the 10:10 group in which they state “Many people found the resulting film extremely funny…”
?
My new car (a Subaru Outback) has a CVT which improves the mpg
My Tundra doesn’t have one of those. Thank you for playing.
“No, it’s more direct and brutal than your guess. The red button doesn’t kill at random; it targets only people who won’t get with the program. The victims don’t even argue against it or get belligerent; they just don’t give a flip, and want to be left alone.”
I accept — I am wrong, and it figures since I didn’t see the video. Just can’t bring myself to watch it, although I probably should to know what this is about.
So what is this, a kind of enviro-revenge fantasy? Is it like if you are an enviro that anti-enviros are, dunno, kinda like the orcs in Lord of the Rings, and it would be “kind of fun” if there were a button that you could press to blow up those nasty orcs?
Was this meant to be Monty Python “The Black Knight” over-the-top-gore as a kind of dig at Hollywood “realistic gore” (Reservoir Dogs, French Connection), only the writing didn’t measure up and it misfired?
For once, Dave Burge (“Iowahawk”) was rather muted in his satire because it seems there wasn’t anything to satirize — the No Pressure clip was that a bad “misfire”, and Dave was left to wondering “What were they thinking?” Just what were they thinking, anyway?
and it would be “kind of fun” if there were a button that you could press to blow up those nasty orcs?
For someone who had the sense not to watch the (stupid) video, you pretty much nail it with that guess. Over the top, unrealistic, but disturbing nonetheless. Creepy.
I drive a fifteen-year-old Tercel with manual transmission that gets fine mileage. If any greenie thinks I should be driving a Prius instead he is welcome to buy me one.
In any case, it’s not about living a cleaner, less-polluting life, no matter what Bob-1 and any other willing sheep of the movement says: it’s about power and control over your followers. If the people behind the video really wanted to make the non-participants in their carbon-footprint thing “see the light” and join in, they wouldn’t have simply killed them; they would have done something to either persuade the non-joiners or at least make them feel ashamed. But the uncooperative ones had already been judged worthless, except as instruments of group control; they were eliminated in order to cow the people who had already joined the group. Look at how the students in the classroom and the office workers were frozen in shock and horror, too terrified to speak to their inhumanly calm teacher and boss. The third and fourth segments were even worse, because this time there were no frightened onlookers. The football team turned on the one lone dissenter, and after he had been blown to bloody bits they cheerfully went off together. And the final one puts us, the viewer, on the side of the killers: Gillian Andersen is alone in her soundbooth when she is destroyed, and we are placed by the camera in the position of the soundman who killed her, as if we were the ones who did it.
It’s a diabolical work, like scenes from 1984 brought to life, only this time the two Minutes of Hate and so on are treated with approval.
Splodey, Youngblood, Gutz & Bones…gotta love that Iowahawk!
I often wonder why is it that nearly all the classy, intellectual humor I come across seems to spring from small government advocates like Iowahawk, Mark Steyn, Dennis Miller, etc?
The left consistently trots out flatulence, feces, vomitus, extreme violence and naughty references to female body parts as if they’re attempting to shock and embarrass their mommies. It all smacks of arrested development.
Curt, I’m just saying that your next Tundra or Tundra equivalent should (and, I think, can) have better gas milage without sacrificing performance. The 10;10 movement should have encouraged people to ask for such things, so that manufacturers have an incentive to produce them.
Andrea nailed the tone of the ad. I found that and the fact that this was supposed to be a serious call for action to combat global warming far more shocking than the actual gore and violence. And I think rickl nailed the fundamental problem. Why develop a red button that kills people who don’t toe the line when you could have developed a green button that cured the problem of global warming directly? I have to agree, the ad really is a fantasy about the red button.
Just got back from dinner — I showed my friend from Rijeka (Croatia) the video. When it was over, he sighed and said “This is very post-modern. Unfortunately, it will be misunderstood by your friends on the internet. American Conservatives don’t understand post-modernism.”
I said “I described it as ‘sarcastic’, but then again, I don’t understand post-modernism either.” My friend said “It is true. You don’t.”
—
Karl, if there was a magic green button, then there really wouldn’t be any pressure for us to do something. The message, which is conveyed in a very stupid and tasteless and actually rather nonsensical way, is that there really should be pressure to act before it is too late for the planet, blah blah blah.
It’s not that rational people don’t understand postmodernism. They understand it very well – as nihilistic anti-human nonsense.
“This is very post-modern”
I agree, AGW in general is science that deserves to be branded post-modern.
Good catch.
The full impact of the film only happens if you listen to the last bit of one of the people behind the film (end 15 secs. of an over 3 min. discussion) where ‘Franny’ speaks with glee about the horror of the individual. She’s cute, effusive and a monster of holocaust proportions all at the same time. This is why guys don’t wear that cute little toothbrush mustache anymore.
Shucking off elitist European philosophy, I would say this: If Darlene from the TV show Roseanne were to make a pro-Green video, this is the kind of video she might make.
The other thing about the ad is that it assumes AGW to be a given. There is absolutely no discussion or debate. In the first two segments, the people who get blown up don’t even say a word. They just fail to raise their hands at the proper time.
The attitude is, “We know what needs to be done. Now get out of our way.”
Someone at another site pointed me to this Greenpeace video, made a couple of years ago. It’s even scarier, when you consider the propaganda that kids are inundated with by schools and the media. I kept waiting for the kid to break into a chorus of “Tomorrow Belongs to Me”.
Karl, if there was a magic green button, then there really wouldn’t be any pressure for us to do something.
Exactly. It’s all about the pressure, that is, coercion, not some environmental problem.
Let me put it this way. Even if you strip away the vileness of this ad, you’re still left with the fact that they don’t offer even a scrap of evidence in support of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. There is no effort to convince the viewer just as there was no effort to change the minds of those who were about to die. These people believe in some version of the red button (and that it is needed). But they don’t believe in some version of the green button even though it would be just as realistic as the red button.
Actually, I think the counter to No Pressure has already been made; it is the “Green Police” commercial shown during the Super Bowl, you can find it on You-Tube, it remains funny as ever, and the “correct-thinking” people out there think it to be profoundly un-funny.
“Green Police” is a corporate message, after all, and the message is that you are supposed to go out and purchase a certain brand of automobile. I get the sense that it advances a kind of “third way” in keeping with telling you to buy their product, that by buying that Audi, you can be “green” without being an “enviro-weenie” like the stereotype Prius driver. A Prius is never shown — instead, the Green Police ride in that Ford NEC (Neighborhood Electric Car) and on Segways, a Segway being the ultimate weenie form of transport used by “mall cops” and other wannabees. That message is flagged by the driver of the Audi roaring past the long line of cars in the “Green Police checkpoint” after being waved past the line for driving a “clean Diesel.”
“No Pressure” shows the enviros to be latent psychos with murderous revenge fantasies. “Green Police” mocks enviros to be regulating weenies who would bully people in silly ways for nonconformance with googy laws. Perhaps the first is threat and the second is satire?
I understand. I hope you understand that I think “the pressure” is supposed to come from within — you’re supposed to be scared that global warming will harm you. The pressure is only being (foolishly) symbolized as being coercive button pushers. You say “There is no effort to convince the viewer just as there was no effort to change the minds of those who were about to die.” Right! I agree that the video is completely lacking in education about the threat, only education on possible cures. Another reason why the video is dumb. But consider also that there is no effort to make the button pushers look the least bit sympathetic. We are supposed to think they are scary, and the video ends up being anti-authoritarian. So, think about it! Why would the video makers make the button pushers seem scary? It certainly isn’t propaganda for coercision!
That last one was for Karl. Paul, great point about the Green Police checkpoint! I think both video are self-mocking efforts by environmentalists. They might be dumb, they might be really bad at making videos which send a clear message, but at least they don’t mind making fun of themselves (and they aren’t out to kill anyone.)
Paul,
I understand your desire to not watch this. However, I think this is one of those rare exceptions. This is something you should see to truly understand the depravity of the minds that produced it.
Sure, only the people that didn’t raise their hands are exploded. And by explosion, I’m not referring to cheap Star Trek special effects in which a picture of a fire ball is super imposed and then persons disappear. Rather, the guts of the non believers are sprayed on the remaining individuals as a lingering reminder that their is no pressure to confirm. Give credit to the acting abilities, you can even hear the survivors gasp and scream at the event and a few whimper in the aftermath.
As Karl points out, the entire tone of the ad is that the “enviromental movement” has gone beyond tolerance and is now assuming power. People are told exactly what they must do, and those who disagree are purged immediately. To that extent, Bob is right about being post modern. Gone is the desire to explain the science and use acceptable societal norms to advance the agenda through logic and objectivity. In it’s place is an advance means to solve the problem efficiently. Like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot; the solution is simply to cleanse society of those who would cause it harm.
Bob-1, like most foreigners, your Czech friend doesn’t understand Americans and has no flipping idea what we think about things. I understand postmodernism quite well. I also understand the urge people like you have to impress foreigners, especially European ones who sigh about postmodernism and how most Americans, except of course for you, a “special” one, don’t understand higher matters like that. It’s a method used by intellectuals from the dessicated and decadent Old Country to control those Americans who are willing to be their poodles.
I agree that the video is completely lacking in education about the threat, only education on possible cures.
What… education on possible cures is provided in the video?
I agree with Scott, more often than not your contributions here are civil and (sometimes) mildly thought provoking. But you are really getting close to completely blowing yourself up.
Hey Andrea: You are mistaken. Please be nice. He is from Croatia, now a US citizen,is extremely patriotic and active in US politics, and it is me who doesn’t understand post-modernism. I do think talking to foreigners can be helpful in getting a different perspective -but beyond that, I’ve always sought them out. I grew up in a pretty homogeneous midwestern town, I was the only Jewish kid in school, and I ended up being friends with the few other kids with roots in non-typical cultures (eg the one Indian kid, etc). No one was or is impressing anyone. Since you guys understand whatever the hell post-modernism is, maybe you can explain why this article has to do with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism
Simple Bob, Starting at the beginning…
Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth
Otherwise known as the big lie… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
Wouldn’t The Big Lie be the “real” objective truth being pushed by the authorities?
I just noticed that Kuhn, the guy who wrote about paradigm shifts, is listed in wikipedia’s article on postmodernism as a prominent postmodernist. I read one of his papers in college – it was assigned in a physics class — it was great! Nothing to do with being anti-human or pro-genocide, fascist, etc. I continue to have no understanding of postmodernism, but this stuff was good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
When I talked about cutting off arms it was in reference to something I read like this…
http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2010/10/01/the-green-and-the-red/
Wouldn’t The Big Lie be the “real” objective truth being pushed by the authorities?
Putting quotes around real doesn’t clarify. Keep your eye simple is a scriptural admonishion. Postmodern just means lying by confusing. Big lie is today better known as journalistic ethics (how’s that for post modern?)
Bottom line, these people and those they align with, are gleeful fascist. Isn’t it neat? Individuals making their own choices are horrific and terrifying to them.
The Big Lie in action is:
The media narrative about “Racist Tea Parties” because (1) parading in through protestors the Black Caucus was “called the n-word repeatedly” – according to a single source. Disproven by five separate published videos, and not defended by the Black Caucus releasing their own tapes (they were all holding flip recorders and waving them around while trying to incite something. When nothing happened, they made it up.) Oh, and a $100,000 reward for video resulted in zero hits.
And (2) an incident where an impassioned fellow is yelling so loud he’s sputtering – and this is “spitting on a black man”.
Postmodern-Considering the lifestyle that many Greens want us to live, shouldn’t that be pre-modern?
EXcuse me Bob, your friend is from Croatia, not the Czech Republic. But I don’t care how “patriotic” a citizen he is, when he says “American conservatives don’t understand postmodernism” he is revealing that he still doesn’t understand Americans. (By the way, your quote didn’t refer to YOU not understanding postmodernism.)
But anyway, I’m through letting you derail the conversation the way you always do. The subject is the video, not teaching you philosophy.
“By the way, I think the problem with the 10:10 movement is that it doesn’t focus on changing market demand and manufacturing instead of changing behavior.”
It seems like intimidating people by threatening them with death is a slightly bigger problem than that.
My conclusion after a smidgen of reading: the video could be said to be postmodern in that it represents multiple contradictory viewpoints and you can detect that multiplicity by noting the sarcasm and anti-authoritarian themes that undermine the message despite focusing your attention on it. For some people, the sarcastic anti-message was funny, but many of you folks don’t see that sarcasm or anti-authoritarian message, and maybe that is because you have different prejudices than I do about environmentalists.
No, Bob, it was a failed attempt at humor which was really a monumental Freudian slip.
Which was the anti-authorian?
The teacher?
The company manager?
The football manager?
The producer?
“…they aren’t out to kill anyone…”
Yet, Bob, yet. The eco-terrorists that receive clandestine and indirect support from the environmental lobby WILL make a mistake and kill someone in one of their ‘actions’. Of course they may realize, like Islamic terrorists, killing in the name of one’s beliefs is okay.
This thing is the Platonic ideal of post-modernism, practically pornographic in its sanitized self-gratification. It would not do to have the non-fanatics simply vanish into thin air — no, just like porn, it must have exactly the right amount of mess: just enough to indelibly make the point, not too much for the moppers to clean up.
“…many of you folks don’t see that sarcasm or anti-authoritarian message…”
That’s because we aren’t in the habit of seeing things that aren’t there. What I don’t understand is how you can be so comfortable lying to yourself. Haven’t you read any history? People don’t change in their fundamentals. When people start fantasizing about murdering their opponents, it always leads to actual real murders. At least it’s all in the open now, and we won’t be as shocked and surprised when it starts happening. Well, I won’t anyway.
It’s too bad, though. I would have liked to visit England one last time, and several people I care about live there. I hope they can get out in time.
Re the “remix”: it’s not so much a remix as it is open-captioning.