Germany uses the weapon of climate change against its own people
By: Rachel Marsden
Berlin has turned farmers into cash cows in the name of keeping green dreams alive
German farmers rolled into Berlin on their tractors last week to have a very
public word with the managers who have revoked their long-standing discount – a
subsidy on diesel fuel, which powers their farm equipment.
It seems that up until now, the government figured that feeding Germans was
important enough to support, outweighing any ‘green’ obsessions. But that all
changed abruptly for reasons that have little to do with the climate change
agenda and more with its desperation for spare change.
The drama kicked off when Germany’s coalition government led by Chancellor Olaf
Scholz found itself in a bit of a bind recently. Team Scholz had quietly moved
€60 billion from a Covid-19 pandemic support fund into a green energy transition
fund. The opposition noticed and finked to the court – which told Team Scholz to
put the cash back because the sneaky move was a blatant violation of a law that
had been ushered in under former Chancellor Angela Merkel specifically in an
effort to ensure that the government was never able to bury itself in debt.
Whoops, too late. Subsequently finding themselves underwater on the overall
annual budget by an estimated €17 billion, they set about looking for ways to
plug the hole.
Farmers, Team Scholz apparently figured, can at least be bilked for cash on the
pretext that the government tax subsidies for the sinful diesel fuel that powers
their equipment deserve to be canceled – sacrificed on the altar of climate
change. It all sounds so virtuous, and not at all like scrambling to compensate
for a major screwup.
Scholz is presiding over the only major economy set to shrink this year,
according to the International Monetary Fund. He stood there with a grin on his
face beside US President Joe Biden last year ahead of the Ukraine conflict, as
Biden said that Washington would “take care” of the Nord Stream pipeline network
(Germany’s economic lifeline of cheap Russian gas). Maybe Scholz was just
daydreaming about how green Germany would be without gas. But there’s nothing
like getting mugged by the harsh economic reality of German deindustrialization
due to a lack of affordable energy to wipe the smirk right off one’s face.
So with Germany now strapped for cash, surely it’s time to really get radical
about focusing on the most critical interests of the average citizen’s daily
life – Ukraine, Ukraine, and Ukraine.
“We are forging ahead with the climate-neutral transformation of our country. We
are strengthening social cohesion. And we are standing closely by Ukraine’s side
in its defense against Russia,” Scholz said, as parliament agreed on a budget
deal. “However, it is clear that we will have to make do with significantly less
money to achieve these goals,” he added. No doubt Germans were thrilled to know
that Ukraine wouldn’t be going without – unlike Germans.
In addition to taxing farmers, jacking up the carbon tax on things like fuel
will help get the job done, the government figures. Way to rip off French
President Emmanuel Macron’s failed plan that sparked France’s Yellow Vest
movement, which gave rise to months of violent unrest. Looking forward to seeing
what color vests Germans end up choosing. Green would be fitting.
Has anyone bothered pointing out to Scholz that increasing taxes on productive
farmers in the name of fighting climate change takes some nerve considering his
own government has overseen coal plants being brought back because their green
dreams turned out to be a massive flop when wind and solar wasn’t sufficient to
power the country’s (and the EU’s) economic engine after shunning Russian gas?
When a wind farm has to be dismantled to expand a coal mine, as was the case in
North Rhine-Westphalia, that doesn’t exactly scream strategic victory – more
like a green wet dream that didn’t survive the glaring light of reality.
This trend of EU governments trying to throw farmers under their own tractors is
rampant. The Netherlands has expropriated farms that failed to comply with EU
climate change legislation, citing research on the impact of belching and
defecating cows. Surely it’s just a coincidence that Brussels is pushing for
relaxed rules on lucrative industrial genetically modified crops, now that they
have all this farmland becoming available in the EU’s top beef exporting
country. According to a leaked draft of EU legislation obtained by Politico
earlier this year, EU countries won’t be able to ban genetically modified (GMO)
crops produced with new technology. Sounds like a looming windfall for companies
like Bayer, Syngenta, and Corteva, in the same way that green tech shareholders
have made out like bandits thanks to underperforming taxpayer-funded climate
change projects.
And it’s not just climate change that has served as a pretext for impoverishing
farmers to the ultimate benefit of the establishment special interests. Ukraine
must be allowed to feed the world’s poor, the EU cried. And who could be
cold-hearted enough to argue with that?
Well, earlier this year, farmers in Eastern European countries stood up and
demanded that Brussels stop the Ukrainian grain, ostensibly destined for the
rest of the world via Europe, from being dumped into their countries and driving
down the price of their own supply. The EU seemed more concerned about funding
Ukrainian farmers than its own. Wonder what could be lurking behind that? “USAID
and Bayer Expand Partnership with Additional $15.5 Million from Bayer to Support
Ukrainian Farmers,” the US government announced in July 2023, with the
industrial GMO giant Bayer announcing deepening cooperation with seed donations
and expanded operational assistance to Ukrainian farms.
So at this point, some folks may still be thinking, “Well, at least the
establishment is only targeting farmers, and it’s all being done in the greater
interests of helping the climate and Ukraine.” Newsflash: the British
government-funded ‘Center for Ecology and Hydrology’ has just published, in the
Public Library of Sciences Journal, a study underscoring the impact that “human
breathing is contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.” The research recommends
“caution in the assumption that emissions from humans are negligible.” Better
hope that no one shows it to the bureaucrats in Brussels or Berlin responsible
for actionable policy.
COPYRIGHT 2023 RACHEL MARSDEN