Site Key Topics Guide

Elements of Peace Obstacles to Peace
Human Psychology and Peace The Nature of Reality
The Climate Change Scam The Science of Global Warming

Home

10:10's Murder Movie

Ron House    October 2, 2010

This is the most disgraceful piece I have yet seen from global warming alarmists. The site 10:10 has made (and very quickly withdrawn) a supposedly comic video that should tell anyone with sufficient wisdom just where we are headed by supporting this anti-scientific hoax. Here it is, please don't watch it with children around.

In the face of immediate condemnation this has hastily been defended as quirky British humour. Sorry. That excuse won't wash. Let’s try to analyse the comedic logic of this video.

Let’s start with a less contentious comedy, the “Ministry of Silly Walks” sketch. If that had been made by (as it was) an outsider, a non-government author, the message of it would be (as it was) a satire upon the absurdity sometimes displayed by government departments. But if it had been made by a government department, it would have to convey a message along the lines of “Yes, we are sometimes absurd, but we are admitting it here and inviting you to have a laugh about it with us.”

So how does that translate into the example before us now? If skeptics had produced it, it would carry the message that sometimes AGW authorities are too heavy-handed and stifle dissent, etc. But if (AS IT WAS), it is produced by the AGW insiders themselves, it has to convey, as the silly walks example shows us, a message like “Yes, we are sometimes violent to critics and we do shut them up and put them out of the way, and we invite you to have a laugh about it along with us.”

The other indicator that this is the correct interpretation is the title: "no pressure". How does that have any comedic value if there really is no pressure? Only if there is pressure, if bad things will be done to you if you publicly disagree with the hoax, only then does the title carry the anti-meaning necessary for it to be comedic. For sure the actual murder of the children is way beyond what they currently intend, but it is impossible to read this as having any comedic logic unless, at a minimum, public dissenters will be deliberately persecuted and silenced.

If you don’t agree, then what message does it convey? Be specific. Comedy has to have an inner logic: if you produce something that looks hateful and you try to excuse it with “only a joke”, that isn’t good enough if it isn’t possible to explain exactly what the comedic logic of the piece was meant to be. If I have that logic wrong in the above, please explain what you see as the correct comedic logic, in detail. I’ll be surprised if it can be done in any way that does not show up the AGW makers of this video as violent totalitarians.

This is all the more disturbing being made by what is, politically and socially, the current "winning side" of the AGW debate. When winners start making jokes about blowing up children who don't believe their propaganda, how far behind is the actual practice? Before you shake your head like that, please remember that powerful establishment figures have already committed criminal acts in its name, have recommended trials and executions for crimes against the planet in its name, and have published serious implicit threats in its name. Hitler started out with short movies showing Jews as scurrying rats needing extermination, and the German establishment at the time utterly ridiculed those prescient folk who warned them how the Nazis would turn out. They didn't live to be told "The joke's on you".

There is a pattern to tyranny: fly a flag for a while and see how it goes; if it is largely ignored, try going a bit further; find out just how much you can get away with - and then do it for real.

This is also a failure of morality as well as a failure of science. Too many people's moral compasses have been gummed up by warming hysteria; they now no longer have the ability to tell the difference between good humour and plain nastiness. That's also why other warmists produced a video mocking the victims of 9/11 by showing polar bears falling out the sky and going splat on the pavement. I don't know how anyone who really cared for animals could stomach making such vile stuff.

Anyway, if you are asked to take part in 10:10 events, watch the video above first, to be sure you know who you will be taking on board as your friends.

Share this
More on:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: 10:10's Murder Movie

Submitted by Ron House on Sat, 10/02/2010 - 12:26.

Phil over on Wattsupwiththat had this wise thought, well worth repeating:

There is more than a little parallel with the extermination of the “undesirables” during the Nazi era when virtual “killing” of five people or “amputation” is justified by the imaginary deaths of 300,000. The Jews and other “undesirables” were also falsely accused of great crimes before they were brutalized. This is how it starts: one small outrageous step at a time. At any point, the process can theoretically be stopped by people with morals and backbone, but each such little step is trivialized as “humor” or it isn’t given the importance it deserves (i.e. the public condemnation), because each such step is deliberately small, yet the goalposts get gradually and inexorably moved (or I should say the out-of-bounds lines) until all sorts of evil is firmly within bounds and justified by unimaginable (and false) accusations of harm being done by the intended targets. Dehumanization is essential to the process. The brutalization during the Nazi era could not have been carried out on the scale that it happened without this essential dehumanizing process. There are (thankfully) generally few people vile enough to do something like this when they consider the victims as fellow humans. The rest of us need to be brainwashed first to consider the victims as non-human or having committed great crimes in order to overcome the natural revulsion that normal human beings feel when doing something like this, either virtually as in this case or in reality as during the Nazi era.

This is NOT some small thing that is happening and it is NOT due to a few radicals or people who have lost their moral compasses. It needs to be understood as a vital cog in the process of POLITICAL elimination of all dissent. When people with dissenting viewpoints are admitted as equals, both academically and humanly, the political (in this case global) brainwashing using exaggerated models based on manipulated data of questionable quality cannot continue. The public at large will demand better data and more realistic and supportable evidence, before allowing this process to continue.

So, step 1 is to paint dissenters as unreasonable, hence the use of the label “deniers.” With this film, we see step 2 of the process, which is to dehumanize dissenters or even anyone not willing to join in enthusiastically (witness the end of the short film, where IIRC the actress playing the part of the teacher in the scene where the children get blown up is herself blown up because she thought that lending support for the cause was enough). Step 3 is the passing of regulations mandating everone’s active participation. Step 4 is elevating violations of such regulations to criminal status. Step 5 is increasingly aggressive criminal enforcement of regulations with forcible detention and imprisonment of those that in step one were labeled as “deniers” that didn’t enthusiastically “mend their ways.” There is no end to this process, as it becomes ever more restrictive and punitive. The whole process, once it is set in motion, succumbs to one of the general failings of governments: that is, that there is no good idea that will not be taken to its most costly and punitive extreme.

Re: 10:10's Murder Movie

Submitted by Lendle (not verified) on Sun, 10/10/2010 - 14:22.

Good parody here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqT4gIZuaq8