Politicians deliver Brazilian whacks after outrage at burning bush

The last 48 hours have seen my social media feeds inundated with hysterical stories over fires in the Brazilian rainforest, reposted by well-meaning but dunderheaded acquaintances. Scanning the news sites, I see the Brazilian rainforest fires are making headline news.

So what’s going on here? Well, we can be sure that with this amount of media coverage it doesn’t have much to do with fires in the Brazilian rainforest. I don’t know how bad the fires are or whether it’s anything unusual, but I’d put a tenner on there having been hundreds of similar fires in the past few years that haven’t generated this much attention. Hell, the world can lose the entire Aral Sea and nobody says anything. The first thing that springs to mind is the global elites detest Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro because he’s – gasp! – right wing and too much like Trump for their liking. So if they want to weaken his position, what better method than saying he’s upsetting the Earth Goddess and encouraging the faithful to unite in his denunciation? This article sheds further light on matters:

France will block an EU trade deal with Brazil and its neighbours over the country’s handling of fires in the Amazon rainforest, a spokesperson for Emmanuel Macron has said.

Brazil’s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro has been criticised around the world for his response to the fires, which scientists say are man-made and campaigners have linked to businesses looking to exploit the land.

“The president can only conclude President Bolsonaro lied to him at the Osaka summit,” a spokesperson for the Elysee told the Reuters news agency.

Okay.

Conservationists say Mr Bolsonaro, who was elected on a pro-business platform, has encouraged the setting of fires as part of his pro-business programme. Brazil’s space research centre, Inpe, has detected 72,843 fires in the Amazon so far this year – an 84 per cent rise compared to 2018, when Mr Bolsonaro was elected. The president has said his country cannot fight the fires.

Is Macron really interested in fires in a country which apparently is used to tens of thousands of them, or is he seeking to protect French farmers from South American beef imports?

Earlier today Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s prime minister, also indicated that Ireland could try and block the EU trade deal.

“There is no way that Ireland will vote for the EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement if Brazil does not honor its environmental commitments,” Mr Varadkar said.

Yes, when I’m told “the lungs of the planet” are on fire, my first reaction is to threaten to yank a free trade deal. How’s Ireland’s beef industry looking after 31st October, by the way?

Mr Macron on Thursday called for the issue to be discussed at the G7 summit, branding it an international emergency.

I suppose international grandstanding is easier than dealing with the riots outside the windows of his own office, isn’t it?

Indigenous groups living within the Amazon have tried desperately to save the land. Many blame illegal ranchers for setting the fires and conservation groups believe the crisis is man made. They also believe the Bolsonaro government has tacitly encouraged people to set the fires in order to clear the land for economic development.

I very much doubt much has changed on the ground since Bolsonaro took office. What we’re seeing here is an international effort to undermine and ultimately unseat a popular president who is not on board with the globalist agenda. If he’d been a good lefty globalist, we’d not have heard a peep about these fires and my Facebook page would still be filled with middle class mothers bleating about plastic in the ocean.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

15 thoughts on “Politicians deliver Brazilian whacks after outrage at burning bush

  1. https://reason.com/2019/08/23/dont-panic-amazon-burning-is-mostly-farms-not-forests/
    Seems the burning is mostly slash and burn agriculture, endemic amongst poor agricultural communities. The answer is more fertiliser/weedkiller so fertility can be restored and pests and weeds removed without burning. Coupled with better economic opportunities for the farmers so they can make a better living without farming marginal land.
    Of course the people of Europe are much better off with expensive food from temperate climes, especially if it prolongs the poverty that promotes slash and burn.

  2. There’s strong evidence Brazil’s rainforest isn’t a natural phenomenon at all. There are large areas of terra negra soil which contains not only considerable charcoal but pottery fragments. Another indicator is the distribution of trees. Normally, in a forest, one would expect areas where one species dominates due to being better adapted to particular local conditions. This is true of northern forests unless they’ve been subject to forestry. Brazils rainforest is not only extremely diverse even on a local basis. But the species represented have a very high utility either as a food source or other materials useful for its inhabitants. It has all the signs of being gardened.
    Worth remembering that the Americas lost around 95% of their indigenous populations in the two centuries following the arrival of Europeans. The rainforest area of Brazil was heavily populated. Early explorers told of villages lining the banks of the rivers. So what’s going on now is little different from what created the forest in the first place. It’s the centuries when human intervention paused are the anomaly.

  3. Tim, I had a similar reaction: this is about lefty hatred of Bolsonaro. Note the casual use of the phrase “far right” by the Independent. It’s also being spun by fake charities like WWF, who (let’s not forget) have been committing human rights abuses in service of their misanthropic goals.

  4. Slash and burn has been used to clear land in the Amazon for a century or more. It’s low cost. After three or four years the soil runs out of nutrients, then they abandon the farm and repeat somewhere else. On the plus side, fungi and pests that attack crops don’t have time to become established. Thus there’s a saving on fertiliser, herbicide and pesticide. Needless to say, yields are exceedingly low.

  5. “I very much doubt much has changed on the ground since Bolsonaro took office. What we’re seeing here is an international effort to undermine and ultimately unseat a popular president who is not on board with the globalist agenda.”

    It’s exactly what they did with a Trump. I cerytime he does something they don’t like the go berserk. When you point out that Obama did it they won’t listen. The classic was the illegal immI grant children separated from their parents. See also (ab)use of Executive Orders.

  6. The Amazon fires were worse last year than this year. Amazonian fires, using very current NASA data, show a decline over the record, and are nowhere close to a record so far in 2019. Check Climate Depot blog. Purging the disgusting, ever-lying media would solve a lot of problems in the West.

  7. Now there’s a surprise, eh?

    Natural fires in the Amazon are rare, and the majority of these fires were set by farmers preparing Amazon-adjacent farmland for next year’s crops and pasture.

    Much of the land that is burning was not old-growth rain forest, but land that had already been cleared of trees and set for agricultural use.

  8. I am going to guess you wrote the headline, and then the post. While the topic and the post is worthy, the headline wins.

  9. I am going to guess you wrote the headline, and then the post.

    Nope, the post title always comes afterwards. 🙂

    While the topic and the post is worthy, the headline wins.

    Thanks!

  10. Bushfires are in any case not a sign of climate apocalypse. For a bushfire to start, you not only need a period of hot dry weather, but an earlier (but not too much earlier) period of cooler wet weather that allows your plants (bushfire fuel) to grow and accumulate. There are no bushfires in the Sahara.

  11. “What we’re seeing here is an international effort to undermine and ultimately unseat a popular president who is not on board with the globalist agenda. If he’d been a good lefty globalist, we’d not have heard a peep about these fires”

    Quite. And Bolivia, which is apparently suffering much the same outbreak of fires in its piece of the rainforest gets a free pass. Perhaps Evo Morales being a full red blooded socialist mightn’t be unconnected with this. Presumably, right of centre Colombia’s patch hasn’t sufficient fires to be worth denigrating their government. But no doubt some keen environmentalist could go down there & start some. Or is the socialist economic disaster of Venezuela sitting on its western frontier just too embarrassing to go near.

  12. Lungs of the Planet.

    Lungs being the organs that inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.

    The Ecoloonies’ comprehensive ignorance of science in general and biology in particular, once again on display.

  13. Brazil could sell those forests to us and we would burn them.
    The process of shipping trees across the Atlantic turns them into bio-mass. Burning this stuff is a Good Thing.
    Then Brazil can grow palm oil plants and sell that oil to us for us to burn. This is also a Good Thing.
    Eco Gold Stars and mutual back slapping all round.
    Does this mean that the Scarey Plastic Crisis has fizzled out?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *