The claim that "Britain is full" is a Malthusian claim.
Argue against immigration all you want, but you're just a variant of green if you think that land use designations are facts of nature.
I'm against environmentalism in its left, centre and right wing forms, just as I am against identity politics in its left, centre and right wing forms.
"But what about the Green Belt?!"
Dissolve it. The Green Belt is the reason many urban areas are compressed and overpriced.
It is a banker's dream.
It is the reason people are lumbered with debt that they will never repay, equivalent to decades of their salary.
The Green Belt is what makes something that should be worth maybe £40,000 cost £450,000 or more.
Century-old workers' terraces are not worth large fractions of a £million because there isn't enough space.
Scarcity has been manufactured rather than homes built.
(I note that those liking the reply to my tweet about Britain being 'full' are unabashedly green, far right, anti-Semitic. I see you, green fascists.)
The Green Belt has done more of what such weirdos claim has been done to the 'indigenous population' by immigration than has been done by immigration.
They are no friends of anyone left out/left behind/etc.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ecological mysticism: "COVID-19 is not a random event. It is a symptom of a global economic system that is destroying the living planet and killing off our magnificent wildlife."
Thousands will cheer him. Mostly from positions of historically unprecedented levels of affluence. The claim surely cannot be denied.
Monbiot: "Around three-quarters of new diseases that infect humans come from other animals. In the case of COVID-19, scientists believe the virus originated in the wild bat population before being transmitted to humans."
"I have no idea what someone's intention was, but I am going to call them a white supremacist racist for using an emoji anyway. Because that's much easier."
He thinks Fox should be aware of the hidden racism encoded in an emoji, but not that he should have tried to understand Fox's statement before pronouncing on it.
Greens have a tendency to oversell themselves as a popular movement.
In reality, they are hostile to the broader population, and only exist as a movement at all by virtue of the generosity of billionaire 'philanthropists'.
And people tire of them.
This was epitomised one morning in Canning Town.
Extinction Rebellion protesters had convinced themselves that their stunt would provoke a popular uprising.
They got dragged off the train and kicked in the head.
Anti-terror legislation was not about protecting us from terrorism. The risk of terrorism increased.
Climate policy is not about saving the planet from climate change. Climate policy will make us more vulnerable to weather.
Covid policy is not about protecting us from viruses.
Maybe people have forgotten. But 'terror' was the reason that people were prohibited from doing things in the 2000s. Security guards at forgotten shopping centres were on high alert, jumping on anyone with a camera.
People would rather be in a car than on a bike. Even in traffic. Wonks can dream of mountain-fresh air and torrents of 'active' travellers. But it may not be possible to persuade people into that Utopia, which needs at least as much scrutiny as resistance to it does.
What if 'active travel' is not a good thing? What if greater dependence on the motor car is a good thing? What if public transport and walking/cycling are limiting of people's preferences and ambitions, and have no realistic hope of achieving what their advocates claim?
My preference is for the car. I do cycle, sometimes even for leisure. But never if it's raining or cold. But I don't pretend these preferences are the model for all of society.