NEWS: June 3, 2009
Bird’s Eye View of the News
Atila Sinke Guimarães
News | Home | Books | CDs | Search | Contact Us | Donate
‘MOTHER EARTH’ DAY - By a unanimous vote, the United Nations declared April 23 should be celebrated as International Mother Earth Day. The votes were cast by the 192 nations represented at the UN General Assembly on April 22, 2009.
Someone might ask: Is the U.N. - an organ of the bourgeois-Masonry - going green? It is actually becoming tri-color, I would respond. It is taking on green tones in its new ecological appearance, red in its new communist demands, and saffron in its new Buddhist philosophy. Let me analyze what happened at that meeting.
Evo Morales’ proposal
The idea of having an international Mother Earth Day was proposed by Evo Morales, the Marxist President of Bolivia. He delivered a speech to the U.N. suggesting that as the 20th century had been called "the century of human rights," the 21st should be known as "the century of the rights of Mother Earth and all living beings.”
“To live in harmony with nature”, he continued, “we should acknowledge that human beings are not the only ones who have rights, but the planet, animals, plants and other living beings also have rights that we should respect” (Adista, May 23, 2009, p.13).
Morales: A Marxist agenda disguised as ecology
You may laugh at Mr. Morales’ philosophical slip affirming that the planet has a life. Anyone who had studied basic biology knows that the earth or a planet is inanimate, and, therefore, does not have life in itself. Some may simply dismiss Morales as an ignorant Indian. I would be a little more cautious. We will see that others - more educated than Mr. Morales - expounded similar theories based on presuppositions that admit an immanent life even to minerals.
Then Morales started to speak about “Mother Earth” as if it were a person: “The U.N. has the duty to make people respect the rights of Mother Earth … Our 192 governments face the challenge of making a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth” (ibid).
Next, he suggested four specific points for his charter for ecological rights. I summarize his arguments, keeping their internal order:
Morales ended his proposal with a communist tirade: “Until now, we human beings have been prisoners of the forces of Capitalism, which considers man as the paradigm of the planet. The hour has come to acknowledge that the Earth does not belong to us; rather we belong to it. Our duty is to safeguard the rights not only of the human beings, but also of Mother Earth and all living beings” (ibid).
- Every ecosystem, animal or vegetal species, each glacier, river or lake, has the right to exist and cannot be destroyed by any irresponsible human behavior;
- Since the resources of the earth are not unlimited, “Mother Earth” has the “right” to the regeneration of the planet’s bio-capacity;
- Rivers, fish, animals, trees and the earth itself – just like men – have the right to live in a healthy atmosphere free of poisons and toxic waste;
- The earth itself as an entity has the “right” to live in harmony with all the species that exist on it.
Translating this into social-political language, it means that the UN should implicitly declare itself the proprietor of every single natural resource on earth, over and beyond any individual or national right. In this way it can administer justice to “Mother Earth” and all living creatures, including inanimate beings.
Once this power is conferred to the UN, the next step is to institute an international court to judge “crimes” against ecology, and to establish an international militia for enforcing its decisions. Another possibility - more in keeping with what we know about Morales’ methods - would be to establish “committees of public safety” to keep watch over the “capitalists” who are spoiling the earth, water, air, etc., accuse and judge them for their “crimes” against “Mother Earth,” and apply the sentences.
I cannot imagine any platform that better facilitates and fosters the ideals of Communism.
The president of the UN General Assembly is none other than Fr. Miguel d’Escoto, an ex-guerilla Maryknoll priest who, through a coup, became Nicaragua’s foreign minister and now leads the United Nations.
Escoto warmly received Morales’ suggestion and added fuel to his anti-capitalist message:
A glacier would have a soul and rights as a person
“We are reaching the point of no-return in our collective consciousness regarding the terrible damage that our species is inflicting on Mother Earth. … Nonetheless, we continue to ravage our natural abundance in the name of an almost religious faith in profit and the market. The economic and financial crisis that is spreading today must not only be considered as a political bankruptcy, but also as a warning sign to the fact that if we want to survive, our hyper-consumerism, our unlimited greed and our obsessive accumulation of power and dominion have no future. …
“Proper administration of our limited resources is a shared responsibility. … Our decision [to declare an International Mother Earth Day] is a symbolic step toward changing the dominant mentality, which has led us almost to the point of self-destruction” (Adista, May 23, 2009, pp. 13-14).
I believe that the message could not be clearer: Out with Capitalism! Forward march to a red Communism disguised as green.
Boff’s theological blah-blah-blah
Present at that UN session was also Brazilian guest speaker Fr. Leonardo Boff, one of the stars of Liberation Theology.
He presented some ideas “to justify” that the earth has a spirit. Many religions, he said, considered earth as a universal mother. It was only in the 16th century, he pretends, that the earth began to be considered as an entity without a spirit, as an untamed nature to be conquered by man. This conception is responsible for the disproportionate distribution of the earth’s resources, he affirmed. It caused “an archipelago of wealth in an ocean of misery. … An insignificant minority monopolizes consumerism and controls the economic processes that cause the devastation of nature and great social injustice” (Adista, May 23, 2009, p. 15).
Then he presented the solution: “There is need of a new model whose fulcrum is the earth, life and a planetary well-living in a spirit of collaboration and care. The central concerns would be: How can we live and produce in harmony with the cycles of the earth and human beings, equally distributing the benefits among all? How can we live more with less?”
Boff: Mother Earth has a spirit and should be venerated
In short, Boff’s fundamental message is: We must have a system different from Capitalism, one that equally divides property and benefits under the pretext of preserving nature and promoting social justice.
I recognize this kind of talk. It is the old Liberation Theology platform now appearing in a green costume.
From this point on, Boff became more dramatic. He painted the Earth as an emotional mother of all mankind. He went so far as to say that the Earth is now “being crucified.” “We must take the Earth down from the cross and resurrect her…” He also pretends that “we are the guardians of this sacred inheritance received from the Universe.” He forgot to tell us whether the Universe is the Father of all of us or is still the Mother...
Thus, the whole circus returns to the stage:
The three of them came together to defend “Mother Earth.”
- Evo Morales, a Communist who rose to power with the support of the left wing of the clergy;
- Miguel d’Escoto, a Liberation Theology priest and ex-guerilla who ascended to the UN presidency through the appointment of fellow communist Daniel Ortega, who in his turn won the last elections supported by Managua’s Cardinal Obando y Bravo;
- Leonardo Boff, a known Marxist priest, subversive agent, promoter of class struggle and advocate of Liberation Theologian.
What more is needed to convince the naïve that the ecological agenda greatly favors Communism?
Are green and red the only colors of the ecological revolution? I believe that saffron should be added to the spectrum. Indeed, anyone who considers that the earth or a river or glacier has its own soul and is deserving of rights is professing philosophical immanentism. That is, he supposes that some part of a divinity would be immanent to these inanimate things, giving them life and making them worthy of the compassion and sentiments we have for personal beings.
We are witnessing the return of the old Pantheism or Gnosis that led paganism astray and is still present in Buddhism and other false religions. It is contrary to Catholic doctrine and condemned by it.
Related Topics of Interest
Progressism Is Becomig Green
A Multi-Faceted Ecology: New Ideal for Religious Orders
The Hermeneutics of Watermelons
Fake Arguments on Global Warming
How a Man Should Act over His Environment
Questions on Ecology
Right to Life - Environment
|Related Works of Interest|
©2002- Tradition in Action, Inc. All Rights Reserved