And therefore: a supranational financial network which, relying on strictly non-elective institutions issued by the United Nations («far from the electoral process», like IPCC—quoted from Senator and €uropean technocrat Mario Monti—) is out of democratic control. It creates a system to suck money from the real economy (you) and funnel it into finance linked to Carbon Credits.
To do this, they need a network of influencers who ...influence, precisely, the mass of bleating sheeps of the populace in such a way that the sheep themselves ask to be hog-tied (They see and talk of us like this ...did you know? I just had the luck of growing very close to some of Them...). You know Greta? Like that.

«But that's fine! If it's to save the planet, it's a win-win! They earn nice money for the good, that's right!»
There is always some genius (mostly from the oxi-moronic liberal left) who says so at this point. Well, no! Shiva explains very well that pollution is not limited at all, quite the contrary! It is encouraged, as CO₂ (always in the sick mind of these, for whom pollution = CO₂) is the basic element for the creation of Carbon Credits (or Carbon Bond, or Climate Bond, or whatever). And since Carbon Credits are an asset, producing CO₂ is also an asset. Clear?
Let us mercilessly destroy the wishful thinking, the fairy world of pseudo-factoids propelled by scribblers and so-called experts of the ipse dixit: the Green New Deal is one of the greatest screwings of the century, and sorry if my Latin is not perfect. Shiva also explains what place these experts occupy in the pyramidal marketing ponzi-scheme of cookware coated in a thin layer of cobalt (quote): we will take a look at this in a few lines.

Now let's leave the general scheme in the background for a moment, and examine the profound social injustice of CO₂-based economic and financial policies with the help of this OXFAM report (in which China's exceptionally low values amaze me to the suspicion).
Note: in this case it is not important to ask what the role of CO₂ is, but simply to observe the distribution of the emissions in the population, and then compare it to the concepts and narratives imposed by the Green New Deal.

In this first image we see how, in the world, individuals with the highest income (10% of the total) are responsible for about 50% of planetary emissions. These proportions are reversed for the poorest 50%, responsible for only 10%. We record these facts.

«See? WE are among the first polluters!»
There's surely someone thinking like that. Hey you, see the power outlet? Go stick your fingers in it. In the meanwhile we go forth.
Let's look at the diagram: it is divided by deciles, this means that each segment represents 763,281,900 people (OECD, 2018). Already from this number it is evident that talking about "European Union", "China", "USA" is quite useless: we are in the presence of a transnational social class of approximately 750 million people, whose consumption in terms of CO₂ emissions is 50% of the total! It includes Jeff Bezos and his colleagues (Elon Musk, Bill Gates, etc., in short, the 1% multimillionaires), and many other minorities like Countess Serbelloni Mazzanti Vien dal Mare. We will call this group "the ultra-rich". We, ordinary western losers, place ourselves at various heights of the light green background.

It is therefore very useful to compare CO₂ emissions (since they are obsessed with fiscal policies based on this gas...) with income, in fact. The next histogram comes to our aid by increasing the "granularity" of the analysis, which shows the total CO₂ emissions in the G20 countries, sorted by social class.
What we observe:
1) The super rich of 10%, following the previous scheme, are those who emit the most; 2) In some countries the orange bar is longer than the green one: this is because the middle class is numerically very large, and therefore total consumption exceeds that of the smallest elite. This changes in the next histogram, as we will see.

Let's move on to per capita emissions. Total emissions are divided by the number of individuals of a specific social class, thus further refining our analysis, and the outcome is logical: that each of the each ultra-rich, emits (and consumes) 5-50 times more than a normie (that's what they call us, did you know?). We therefore pass from a qualitative analysis ("the rich countries/Westerners pollute") to a quantitative one ("the ultra-rich pollute this-much more than the others"). Curiosities such as that the German bottom 50% slightly exceeds the Chinese top 10% only reinforce this figure.

How do these élitarian guys reason? They look at the total emissions and from the edge of the heated pool they tell us «You are more people, you emit more, therefore 25% €uro-tax on meat» (let's use it as an example. Which means Green New Deal, what Dr. Shiva told us about, etc).
Look at how, through the examination of the income and emission data, the casted shadow of a giant cucumber approaching behind us can be seen clearly, with the objective that we know. But who does this meat-tax affect? Easy: the non-élite, subordinate social groups, which already emit little CO₂ in proportion, those who live off work and who suffer these price increases (while the wage remains rigorously idle, don't you hear the bell of the reversed class struggle ringing?). A 25% tax on meat is not even noticed by the rich, but it fucks all the others up (how is my Aramaic, is it improving?). The only ones who are happily afloat are - as Shiva says - the «Liberal Burgeoises» (who are liberal as long as it suits them): the one who is enough at the top to afford to have someone beneath on which to dump the "green taxes", And is animated by a toxic moralism of bio-social paternalism.
He, too, will have to pay the protection money ("pizzo") to the IPCC Mafia (© Shiva) but that is all part of it, as well as these guys are probably investing in juicy Carbon Credits and ESG funds.

We can therefore look at per capita CO₂ emissions as a faithful representation of the distribution of income in a consumerist economy/society. Who knows, maybe some researcher has already investigated the matter and established some relationship? We also find an important fact: analyzing emissions in particular and by social group is very useful, while general statistics tend to hide the imbalances in the distribution of emissions.

So far, the reconnaissance of enemy lines provides a rather dismal picture of the firepower and organization of the opponent. Positioned on the hill we spot the heavy financial artillery, and then we try to get closer to see from which guns they shoot at us.
I immediately declare myself a non-expert in finance, in fact I would like someone who knows about ESG funds to talk more in depth about them, so I too could learn something new. By virtue of my declared incompetence, I abstain from financial evaluations and limit myself to sniffing the air in this area. Which already emanates a certain stench.

What does ESG mean? Environmental Social Governance, that is, a set of parameters decided by the United Nations (has anyone asked you something about it? No, in homage to the consideration they have of you). And here the aforementioned stench is already beginning to be felt: you want to be an ecologist, but what are the "independent members of the board of directors" about? What do women's quotas have to do with it? No mention of industrial/production processes... Can you tell me about child labor? So I'm curious to see the supply chain of the Rare Earths used for the very ecological mass electric devices, and the ratings of the companies that produce them... And we will soon see them!

Let's leave aside the fact that "sustainable" investment funds are yet another bubble, in which banks act as pusher for unsuspecting small customers - because "hey, it's a sustainable investment, do you wanna be called a denier?". And it's done, as chickens in the yard guarded by foxes. See the summary of Credit Suisse's Sustainable Funds! No comment!  Zero Hedge already talked about that, I'm just combining different information. In fact he also provides us with the composition of the 10 largest investors. What an antics!

Does this correspond to what Dr. Shiva explained, doesn't it? If by chance there is someone still in the «conspiracy!1! phase», In the «de'nier!1!» which, like any good projection, constitutes precisely the phase of negation of reality (denial), please leave it, move on.
As in the classic drug dealer network, or pyramid marketing, the money is taken away from the fools at the base who fall into it –or, in this case, through an oxymoronic Obligation– to then go up to the top by capillarity, enter a financial circuit and generate infinite wealth for the élite of puppeteers feeding at the crib. Infinite crib, as CO₂ is inherent in life and is part of the Carbon cycle. It will be like having an umbilical cord from which to receive infinite lymph, coming from the vital functions of living beings and corresponding to them. Thus the financial management of the élite, favored by a class of prostituted Scientologist technocrats, ends up controlling the real world and the biological life that generates the CO₂. The financial management then feeds on, transforming it into profits and at the same time pushing into the carbon cycle, which means within every living being! The goal is therefore to control the carbon cycle for biological purposes as the supreme form of power –see Biopower– and money is only a means: they are interested in pulling everyone into the land of toys, as the salesman Al Gore puts it. The more chickens that enter the cage, the more pervasive and omnipresent the power of the puppeteers will be.
 

(By the way, Shiva is very angry with Al Gore because, as you will recall, he has been a major climate alarmist for many years - famous for his failed predictions by the way - and has been making money on this for many years by creating ecological financial instruments and doing several "manipulations" as explained here.)

This so far described is a process that has been going on for many years, which we call the Financialisation of Nature. In this regard, I invite you to follow the journalist Corey Morningstar (@elleprovocateur) who has produced an infinite amount of inquiries in this regard.
For now we are satisfied with the following: notice the language and the choice of terms: «Stakeholder capitalism», «nature action agenda», «natural risks are business matters»...the usual mainstream, in short, the top-down to avoid, mentioned in a previous post, «Questione di metodo» (not yet translated...).
Sustainability has become mainstream, so stay away from this sustainability which is nothing but greenwashing. Like a reversed King Midas, the mainstream transforms everything it touches into s~.

Small break here.
Time will tell if, with the fall of the macroeconomic paradigms of the last 40 years, these pirates will be able to unlock the trillions of dollars of (public, ça va) funding they always talk about. In that case these private funds will fly a lot, I guess. The COVID-19 crisis has caused the liberal dogma of the prohibition of debt monetization in the €urozone to evaporate by magic («Printing money= inflation, debt, burden on future generations, bla, bla...» we understand each other), but from the time of Reaganomics to today nothing more than a goose-game has been done by returning in practice to government central banks, but this time with completely different interclass relations from the "thirty glorious". This means that the élites have taken the state machine in their hands, and will use it to print all the money they need. Up to now they have enriched themselves with various QE, "whatever it takes" etc., but all those bits of free money are also to be invested somewhere: among other investments (who knows... AI, wars, social engineering, global stings, digital identity ...) there is also the productive "reconversion" and "energy transition" to ensure new life to sectors that have exhausted their profitability curve.
Break finished.

[(¹) Citation of the famous italian headline «Fate presto!» calling for structural reforms a.k.a. austerity during the 2011 spread crisis.]

How do you move the flock where the wolves disguised as shepherds want? With fear and anxiety primarily. Secondly, with the vanity and the desire to feel superior without effort, simply by sitting on the Right Side indicated by special neon signs. A very obnoxious guy, and therefore I like him, named this "Piddinitas" (P-D, Partito Democratico), which does not mean voting for the Democratic Party, but exemplifies that mindset. Here you can admire Greta tracing the furrow «instilling hope and awakening consciences», and Alessandro Gassmann defending it (²), showing us the link between "Scientology" and contempt for democracy. Among other things, praised by hordes of users.

[(2) Parody of a quote from Mussolini: «It's the plow which draws a furrow, it's the sword which defends it». Alessandro Gassman is a rich, cosmopolite and mediocre actor, famous because of his father. Vittorio ]

I don't want your hope.
I don't want you to be optimistic.
I want you to panic.
I want you to feel the fear that I fear everyday.

I want you to act as if we'd be in an emergency.

I want you to act as if your home'd be on fire.
Because it is.

It is needed today, not tomorrow, a scientifically funded subject
which leads the way to heal the planet, and
forces governments to make it the foremost subject of their agendas.

Commendable good intentions, but total inversion of the "engine" to reach them: I imagine Al Gore, Bill Gates and the other misfilanthropes of the élite to "strengthen the unions" and "create social safety nets". Unfortunately there are millions like that. We have to gently awaken (?) them, because it is on this type of people that the action of the huge machine that has been built is based. They are not enemies, they are people who urgently need to understand the extent of the cucumber upon their arses incumbent. Polemical Architect is here to help us find a different perspective, adding a crumb of extra thoughts: a difficult way, which accepts the challenge of pursuing both sustainability, democracy and equality. A way that rebels against the use of ecologism (false sustainability, greenwashing) as an instrument of domination over Man and monetization of Nature.

Finally, it seems clear to me, from this analysis, who are the enemies to fight off, who deserves a caress and who a punch on the snout. We have charted an important route, which sets a series of landmarks and stopovers to be used for other long-range missions, in which to explore the territories ...of Mordor.