Marx on Monday: If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist!

Let’s face it – we live in a country full of idiots.  It is no mean feat, therefore, that UKIP reject James Delingpole, thanks to his article on wind farms in this publication on Friday, has firmly established himself as the biggest idiot of them all.

In his article (and I use the word “article” in the loosest possible sense) he glibly recommends that those in rural areas, who care more about their scenic views and house prices than they do for the future of our children and the planet, ostracise  those people who have applied to build wind farms on their land.

The truth is, as all right thinking people know, that the brave individuals who are prepared to sacrifice their own views and the value of their houses, by applying to erect a few modest and tasteful 800 feet high wind turbines on their land, should be applauded by their neighbours – not ostracised. If anything these selfless individuals should be rewarded by the erection, alongside the wind turbines, of statues to their memory. Certainly no one should begrudge them the estimated £3.5 million a year they will receive in revenue from the wind farms on their land.

Of course Delingpole claims, in his usual rabid fashion, that this £3.5 million a year is taxpayers’ money paid as a government subsidy to those who have built the wind farms. Well of course it is! Everyone knows that the wind farms themselves produce very little electricity. If the only reward for those steadfast citizens who erect them was the profits from the electricity generated they’d be bankrupt within weeks. What idiots like Delingpole don’t realise is that without the millions of pounds of government subsidies generously paid for by the taxpayers no-one would be able to afford to build any wind farms and the planet, and our children, would be doomed!

Those who deserve to be ostracised are the small handful of climate change deniers, people like James Delingpole, who are quite frankly fascist! And I do not make that accusation lightly.  It is an accusation I can easily prove by referring you to the wise words of George Monbiot, the cleverest and most modest man that ever lived, who warned us that planning restrictions on building new wind farms is “not only a fascist erosion of our freedoms but will lead to the destruction of our planet.”

And George is not alone in his view – that other intellectual giant of the left – Ed Milliband – warns us that, “it is socially unacceptable to be against wind turbines in your area – like not wearing your seatbelt or running over a child on a zebra crossing.”

But idiots like Delingpole – and fortunately there are precious few of them – still persist in ranting against wind farms – pointing out that not only do they not produce any electricity, not only are they a blot on the landscape, not only do they ruin nearby property values, not only do they kill millions of bats and birds, not only do they cause untold health problems for those who live near to them – but all this mayhem and destruction is paid for by millions of pounds of subsidies by the very taxpayers who oppose them!

The trouble is that none of what Delingpole says is true – well – not much of it!

I was walking in the South Downs, that most beautiful region of the English countryside, only last week, and stopped to admire the Glyndebourne wind turbine, towering nearly 70 metres above the rolling hills. As I stood marveling at how much the turbine had enhanced a view that, before its erection, had been unchanged for millions of years, I was aware that someone had walked up behind me.

“Beautiful isn’t it?” he gasped.

“It certainly is,” I turned to smile at the newcomer, and recognised him immediately as the under fire Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change – Ed Davey.

“I don’t know how people can be against them,” he cooed.

“But there are some idiots out there,” I replied, “people like James Delingpole. He’s always pouring scorn on wind farms.”

“I remember him from Oxford,” Ed replied, “he was an idiot then and he’s still an idiot now. What does he have to say about wind farms?”

“He says that they kill a lot of bats and birds,” I replied.

“That’s rubbish,” Ed scoffed, “even in a large country like the USA only just over 2 million birds and bats are killed each year by wind turbines – and only a few thousand of them are rare protected species like bald eagles and of course there’s the 3,000 protected and endangered golden eagles killed directly by wind farms over the last ten years in California alone.  If we take the entire world only around 110 million birds and bats are killed by wind turbines every year – including one hundred of the last three hundred surviving whooping cranes in the world – a third of the population. But even an idiot like Delingpole must realise that the extinction of a few species of birds is a small price to pay for saving the planet. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds do – they are in favour of wind turbines no matter how many birds, endangered species or not, they kill!”

“Deloingpole also says they call terrible health problems,” I played Devil’s advocate.

“That’s almost not true,” Ed countered, “tests in America have found that only around 5% of those people who live within two miles of a wind turbine will suffer from serious mental health issues.”

“That’s one in twenty people,” I pointed out.

“Actually it’s a lot higher than that,” Ed smiled sheepishly, “the 5% statistic was from a survey commissioned by Big Wind, an American pro wind farm action group, the real figure from independent surveys that we’ve seen is nearer to 25%.”

“So one in four!” I gasped, “and what sort of health problems are we talking about?”

“Each wind turbine emits a constant high pitched whine, a bit like a conversation with George Monbiot,” Ed replied, “the noise causes sleep deprivation, stress, mood disorders and a 500% increase in the rate of suicide.”

“Suicide?” I repeated.

“That’s right,” Ed nodded, “the noise from wind turbines depresses those who live nearby – but think how much more depressed they would be if the planet was destroyed by people like Delingpole.”

“Good point,” I conceded, “but surely they should have done tests on animals before building wind farms near to people?”

“They did,” Ed corrected me, “they built a huge wind farm on a tiny island off Taiwan and conducted a three year study on the health effects on the 400 goats who lived there.”

“And what happened?”

“The results were inconclusive.”

“How do you mean inconclusive?” I asked.

“The survey was supposed to last three years,” Ed replied, “but after only two and a half years all of the goats were dead from sleep deprivation.”

“So did they learn anything from the tests?”

“Absolutely,” Ed nodded, “scientists were unsure if the widespread depression suffered by those who lived near wind farms was caused by noise pollution or falling house prices – but as goats don’t really worry about house prices scientists concluded it must have been the noise.”

“Do wind farms effect house prices?” I asked, “I heard on the news this week that they do.”

“This is all the fault of that Tory buffoon Owen Paterson,” Ed scowled, “he’s commissioned a report proving that wind farms can cause nearby house prices to plummet by as much as 50%.”

“I hadn’t heard about that,” I replied.

“That’s because we’ve managed to suppress it,” Ed sighed, “but it’s only a matter of time until it comes out.”

“Delingpole also claims wind farms don’t actually produce any electricity.”

“That’s just pure lies,” Ed shook his head in disgust, “okay they don’t produce electricity if it’s not windy, and they have to be turned off and locked if it’s too windy, but they work perfectly well on the days when wind conditions are perfect.”

“And how often is that?” I asked.

“About one day in ten,” Ed replied.

“And Delingpole also claims they’re uneconomic,” I told Ed.

“That’s just drivel,” Ed started to lose his temper, “it may be true that a wind turbine will never produce enough power needed to make a wind turbine, let alone dismantle a redundant one, and it might be right that they require massive government subsidies to build and run them, but they are saving the planet for the future generations.”

“And giving us cheaper electricity,” I added.

“Well, no, not exactly,” Ed grimaced, “the use of wind power has seen fuel bills in the UK increase on average by £112 a year.”

“So wind farms do kill hundreds of millions of bats and birds, as well as people and goats,” I summed up Delingpole’s puerile arguments, “they also cause untold health risks, they devastate property prices, cost the taxpayers billions in subsidies and higher energy bills, only work 10% of the time and, even then, produce very little electricity and, in spite of people like you and me finding them beautiful, surveys have shown that 93% of people find them an ugly blot on the landscape.”

“That all sounds about right,” Ed replied.

“So how can you still justify them?” I played Devil’s advocate.

“Simple Kevin,” Ed replied, “as George Monbiot pointed out if you oppose wind turbines you are a climate change denier, a holocaust denier and a fascist.”

“But what about the evidence against wind turbines?” I protested.

“Forget the evidence,” the Liberal secretary of state for climate change shook his head, “answer this question – are you a fascist?”

“No,” I protested.

“Then you must be in favour of wind farms,” he replied.

“Are you saying that if you oppose wind farms you are automatically a fascist?” I sought clarification.

“Absolutely,” Ed nodded.

“But James Delingpole opposes wind farms,” I informed him.

“Then I’m afraid that James Delingpole,” Ed Davey fixed me with a steely glare, “is a fascist!”

17 comments on “Marx on Monday: If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist!

  1. Henry Brubaker (@Inst_4_Studies)
    August 26, 2013 at 10:41 am #

    Once again Marx lets us know who the real enemies of progress are. We need more champions of the left telling us what are opinion should be as there clearly isn’t enough of them already

  2. Rocco
    August 26, 2013 at 10:46 am #

    The economic arguments against wind farms are strong enough – theres no need to adopt ridiculous nature worship.
    The mills and factories, etc, of the industrial revolution destroyed views; they were decidedly anti-picturesque. There were plenty of aesthetes who thought them ugly, eye-sores, monstrous.
    But what of it? Property rights are what matter, and the fact is, nobody can own a view.
    To see how ridiculous the idea that one can ‘own’ a view is, consider that if you could, you would have the right to take the sun to court, for going down and preventing you from enjoying your garden.
    Regarding the bird-worship involved in the conservative opposition, again the real issue is private property. If they are wild birds, they are by definition unowned, and their deaths (while tragic) are, strictly speaking, neither here nor there. If they are a “protected species”, that means they are owned by the State. But by what right does the State claim possession of them? Put simply, “might makes right” – nothing other than this. So why should anyone care less about the accidental destruction of alleged property?
    It must be borne in mind, that the origin of such attitudes was Romanticism. That is, a conscious rejection of human, and material, progress. Novelists and Poets looked at the industrial revolution with horror, because of a fantastical belief in noble savages and nobler peasants. No-one prior to the 18th century ever thought the countryside, the untouched landscape, was wonderful -they thought them terrifying.
    And with good reason: Man had not conquered it yet.

    • Rocco
      August 26, 2013 at 10:53 am #

      *thought it terrifying*

  3. Kevin Algar
    August 26, 2013 at 11:04 am #

    Reblogged this on A Riverside View and commented:
    If you are against wind turbines, this gives you all the ammunition you need to present your very valid argument.

  4. Twiney
    August 26, 2013 at 11:28 am #

    Wonderful article!

  5. therealguyfaux
    August 26, 2013 at 2:02 pm #

    “The word ‘Fascism’ has now no meaning except insofar as it signifies ‘something not desirable’. ” — George Orwell, “Politics And The English Language,” essay, 1946.

    Luckily, I was assigned to read this essay in school about 40 years ago, and even then that word was bruited about promiscuously and shamelessly. Obviously I cottoned on pretty quick to the fact that “Fascism” is the Left equivalent of “You’ve got lurgy/cooties/whatever” and had been for over a quarter century by the time of my having read the essay.

    It’s almost as if this whole Crying-Fascism (in a crowded theatre?) bit is on a par with some sort of mid-Victorian play with hammy actors– the moustachio’d villain in the top hat and cape, telling the ingenue “At last! Now I have you in my clutches!” and our young lady, protecting her virtue, replying, “Unhand me, you fiend! No! No! A thousand times no! I should die sooner than ever dishonour myself by acceding to your bestial lust!” But, just in the nick of time, our hero comes along: “What have you done to her, you craven cur? I am obliged to thrash you!”, as he fiercely drubs the malefactor senseless and our heroine, practically swooning, coos to him, “Thank you– my Champion!”

    Of course, this sort of nonsense nowadays has all the aroma of panto: “You’re a Fascist!” “OH NO HE’S NOT!” “Oh yes he is!”, for anyone with enough of a jaundiced eye.

    But if it IS panto, then we should have no trouble figuring out who the horse’s arse is, should we? You would think so, at any rate– but how many HAVE figured it out?

  6. jazz606
    August 27, 2013 at 8:42 am #

    I’ve been told that I’m a fascist and also a bigot. Should I be concerned ?

    • Phil B
      August 27, 2013 at 11:20 pm #

      No – it means that the opponent cannot answer your argument with logic and reason.

      It is the school playground equivalent of taking their ball home when they are losing.

      I LOVE being called a fascist and/or a bigot or “phobic”. It means I’ve won th argument.

      • Steve
        August 28, 2013 at 7:38 pm #

        “I LOVE being called a fascist and/or a bigot or “phobic”. It means I’ve won th argument.”

        It may also mean that you’re a fascist or a bigot though. These things are not mutually exclusive

    • Noa
      August 27, 2013 at 11:31 pm #

      Certainly! But carry on anyway. Infamy and a Nuremburg style trial will be yours as soon as your local socialist party can commandeer the village hall for the purpose.

  7. tanker21
    August 27, 2013 at 1:41 pm #

    I think all wind turbines should have a line of LEDs up the tower which illuminate to show what percentage of the published capacity each turbine is producing at any moment. This could be introduced via a Private Member’s Bill perhaps?

    We the People could then readily assess the uselessness of any in our line of sight.

  8. Climatism
    August 27, 2013 at 2:53 pm #

    Reblogged this on CACA.

  9. Peter
    October 16, 2013 at 1:45 am #

    I know I am a little late as I found this “Article” while looking for information on an Australian wind farm.
    Is this person serious or are they writing from an Asylum?


  1. If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist! | A Riverside View - August 26, 2013

    […] If you are against wind turbines, this gives you all the ammunition you need to present your very valid argument. here. […]

  2. Marx on Monday: If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist! | CACA - August 27, 2013

    […] Marx on Monday: If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist!. […]

  3. Token Gesture To The Folly Of Green Tea Madness | CACA - October 18, 2013

    […] Marx on Monday: If you’re against wind farms you are a Fascist! | […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: