Skip to content

Green Leader: Being On Benefits Worse Than Poverty In India

January 3, 2015

By Paul Homewood



Leader of the UK Green Party, Natalie Bennett, gave us all a telling insight into how greenies’ minds work in this interview with the Economist this week.


They are broadly against consumption, for example: “The world is sodden with stuff, it cannot have more stuff,” said Ms Bennett. Yet they do not appear to have considered what that would mean for billions of the world’s poorest people, almost none of whom live in Britain. When Bagehot suggested to her that there was a problem with this, Ms Bennett said he was worrying too much: to be poor in India wasn’t so bad as to be on benefits in Britain, she suggested, “because at least everyone else there is poor too”.



They would rather the poor were poorer, provided the rich were less rich.

  1. Joe Public permalink
    January 3, 2015 12:57 pm

    “The world is sodden with stuff, it cannot have more stuff,” said Ms Bennett.

    The utter, utter hypocrite:

    • Retired Dave permalink
      January 3, 2015 5:27 pm

      Absolutely Joe – the best laugh has to be the “Carbon Cuts Not Jobs Cuts” T-shirt.

      • January 3, 2015 6:46 pm

        Agreed. My question to those who want to remove fossil fuels or cut them back dramatically is “name one thing in your life that does not depend on fossil fuels, either directly or indirectly.”

  2. January 3, 2015 3:07 pm

    Reblogged this on the WeatherAction News Blog and commented:
    As good as saying ‘The poor noble savages just don’t know any better’.

    No wonder India has such a strong opinion on the green imperial meddlers in ivory towers.

    • January 3, 2015 4:29 pm

      I’m sure she didn’t ask people in India. As you note, India is not keen on meddling, rich outsiders who don’t see or care about the consequences of their predictions. Let’s send the lovely Mc. Bennett to a slum in India and check back with her in 5 years on how “not bad” it is to be poor in India.

  3. January 3, 2015 4:27 pm

    Green-Leftism: Intellectually bankrupt nonsense.

    There is potentially plenty of everything for everyone.

    All we need to do is unlock the stuff, which is infinite for all practical intents and purposes, through superior technology and superior organizing principles. I have reasonable faith in superior technology – not so much for the superior organizing principles. Despite that, things keep getting better anyway!

    Certainly Green-Leftism is not a superior organizing principle though. Pick something else if you want to stop world-hunger for the poverty-stricken and/or be able to afford more cool stuff for the more wealthy and well-off. I see no contradiction in both poor getting rich, and rich getting richer. As a matter of fact, that is precisely the case. Must drive Ms. Bennett nuts!

    Hypocrisy simply drips and oozes from this Ms. Bennett person. Do these people even possess the vaguest sense of their elitism and utterly cold lack of compassion?

  4. Allan M permalink
    January 3, 2015 5:06 pm

    When I wer a lad, we used to gather round the one copy of The Economist we could afford each year and read (very slowly) interviews with idiot politicians who told us we could make do with less. So we could have crumbs and circuses instead of bread. We wuz poor, but we wuz ‘appy. Stupid c*w.

    • Streetcred permalink
      January 4, 2015 1:28 am

  5. Retired Dave permalink
    January 3, 2015 5:35 pm

    These people really are thick – but I guess they are right if you think about it. Everybody in the UK will be living like my great grandparents did, spending up to 16 hours a day in the fields, trying to earn enough to feed their family.

    This piece from Matt Ridley’s Rational Optimist puts it in perspective –

    “One reason we are richer, healthier, taller, cleverer, longer-lived, and freer than ever before is that the four most basic human needs-food, clothing, fuel, and shelter-have grown markedly cheaper. Take one example: In 1800, a candle providing one hour’s light cost six hours’ work. In the 1880s, the same light from a kerosene lamp took 15 minutes’ work to pay for. In 1950, it was eight seconds. Today, it’s half a second. In these terms, we are 43,200 times better off than in 1800.”

    The Greenies love the idea of a return to 1800 style living.

    The Readers’ Digest article about Matt Ridley’s book summarises why we don’t want to go back.

  6. Kon Dealer permalink
    January 3, 2015 11:15 pm

    What an arrogant, hypocritical, pig-ignorant, blinkered, out-of-touch jizzweasel.
    In short a typical “green”.

  7. Joe Public permalink
    January 4, 2015 12:24 am

    Hypocricy is a common trait amongst Greens. (Maybe it’s a pre-requisite?)

    Green Party’s Baroness Jenny Jones – who slammed black cabs as London’s ‘most polluting’ vehicles – claimed for more taxis than all of her colleagues combined:-

  8. Allan M permalink
    January 4, 2015 9:48 am

    By saying that it’s easier to be poor in India, because those around you are poor, it’s as though she imagines that the only problem with poverty is that it reduces one’s status with one’s peers. No conception of the effects of real poverty, disease, starvation, etc..

    I only hope that by reaffirming that she is a stupid cow, that I haven’t offended any Hindus.

  9. Philipoftaos permalink
    January 5, 2015 3:17 am

    From what I have read, many of the “Greenies” would prefer to eliminate billions of people than alow them to use fossil fuels to improve their lives. I think one of the Royals offered to come back as a virus in order to “thin the herd”.

    • January 5, 2015 3:25 pm

      I am always reminded of the “Let them eat cake” mentality when I look at Greens. Completely out of touch with reality and they don’t even seem to know it.

  10. cornwallwindwatch permalink
    January 5, 2015 3:47 pm

    Reblogged this on Cornwall Wind Watch.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: