The Great Climate Business: How the Left Turned CO₂ into a Religion

The left has prostituted the climate. Its scientific approach has been uprooted so that politicians, both national and international, use it as an excuse to promote their interests.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the world's leftists agreed on an ideological colonization strategy based on social causes. The tactic was clear: promote divisive discourses (between classes, races, genders, etc.) to justify state intervention.

https://derechadiario.com.ar/uruguay/politica/apagon-mas-cortesia-del-monopolio-estatal

One of those artificial conflicts is the climate, where supranational organizations impose how humanity should live. This materializes in the 2030 Agenda, through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

At first glance, the SDGs seem harmless: "end poverty," "zero hunger," etc. But upon deeper inspection, measures emerge that threaten basic rights like freedom and property.

This Agenda was not put to a vote by the citizens of any country, and yet, the UN demands its compliance from 200 nations. It already happened with the Millennium Goals in the 90s, and they are already cooking up new goals for 2050–2075, all to perpetuate this business.

The business of climate change

The climate generates interest and, with it, funding. Organizations like the World Bank, the IDB, and the UN allocate funds to useless consultancies that no one reads, while the elites steal.

It no longer matters if climate change is real or not. It doesn't matter if carbon in the atmosphere increases, if there's a hole in the ozone layer, or if what the scientific method suggests has simply stopped mattering.

The only relevant thing is that the communists designed an apocalyptic climate forecast to screw you over.

https://derechadiario.com.ar/uruguay/politica/resultados-elecciones-2025-uruguay

As if that weren't enough, the hypocrisy is evident: the biggest emitters are China, Europe, and the U.S., but Europe, for example, demands "climate sustainability" from its trading partners.
The leftists gave Brussels another card to extort in negotiations. The concepts are unsustainable.

At the national level

In Uruguay, this circus is run by the champagne left, which —like all leftists— hates the countryside and private property.

A recent example was the statements of María Fernanda Souza, daughter of Blanca Rodríguez. The latter, a brand new senator who theoretically came to elevate politics, in a gesture of nepotism and baseness, was the one who placed her daughter as the national director of Climate Change.

María Fernanda made her presence known on social media defending an unjustifiable purchase by the INC: a 4,400-hectare ranch for 32.5 million dollars.

An act of total disrespect to the taxpayer, which reaffirms something the average leftist doesn't want to understand: public resources must be managed as what they are, belonging to others.

Some of the concepts María Fernanda mentioned:

• "Too many corporations buying land"
  So what? Individual freedom and meritocracy are pillars of development. More investment = more progress and better prices.
• "Foreignization"
  It was built with immigrants. That degree of xenophobia is not understood. Besides, we need their investment for the good of all.
• "Ecological impact"
  Even an organic garden alters the ecosystem. The only thing that matters is that the system is sustainable.
• "Loss of sovereignty"
  Sovereignty is not measured in hectares, but in freedom.
• "Concentration of wealth and inequality"
  Disguised communism. Friedman said it: "Those who prioritize equality over freedom lose both..."
• "Autonomy"
  Very ironic to talk about autonomy while asking for more state intervention.
• "Critics only see the expense, not its political dimension"
  The gesture is the scandal. Nothing is guaranteed with that purchase.
• "Redistributing land is an act of power"
  From the State, it's authoritarianism. From the people, it's freedom.

A concept the leftist doesn't understand: the State doesn't produce

The people produce.
People demand, people save, people invest, people work. That's the market.

María Fernanda also criticizes the agro-export model. It was that model that was the engine of growth during the years of the Broad Front.

With soybeans at 600 USD/ton and going from 10,000 hectares in 1999 to 1.4 million in 2016, that wasn't the State, María:
It was the effort of the producers. It was capitalism.

That growth poured 6.23 dollars into the national economy for every dollar caused (María Inés Terra, 2010).

Trump said it better:

"When it comes to climate impact, I'll always listen to a producer before a left-wing radical or a bureaucrat in a suit."

The producer's stability depends on the care of their asset. Their system must be sustainable.
The communist model stops that machine, stops development, stops progress. All to fulfill the whims of a bunch of communists.

Fortunately, Uruguay is waking up

Very soon there will be a ballot on the table defending the three essential rights: life, property, and freedom.