If progressives really wanted to reduce carbon emissions in America, they would cut off power to their own filthy liberal cities

For all the talk of “climate crisis” and “we’re all gonna die if we don’t stop global warming,” it turns out that city-dwelling liberals use far more energy than conservative, rural Americans.

That’s because cities are, by their very nature, artificial constructs that depend on the delivery of multiple inputs in order to survive. Cities can only exist because of a constant resupply of fuel, electricity, water and food. These items are pumped, trucked or otherwise delivered into the cities at high cost, resulting in the expenditure of fossil fuels for the electricity and diesel fuel needed to accomplish these tasks.

And where do all these inputs come from? Rural America, of course. That’s where nearly all the food, water, fuel and electricity actually comes from, which is why it’s more cost efficient to access those resources locally, right where they are produced.

Rural living is sustainable living, yet liberal city-dwellers scream and whine about how rural Americans are destroying the planet, even while a typical city liberal is juicing celery that was imported from a thousand miles away. City liberals seem to have no idea whatsoever where water comes from, similar to the way AOC was confused the first time she saw a kitchen garbage disposal. Accordingly, they have no idea that every drop of water they consume in the shower or dishwasher comes with a carbon footprint, since it’s pumped by energy created in part by fossil fuels.

Thus, city-dwelling liberals scream and point the finger at rural Americans for everything, yet utterly fail to see that they, themselves, are the largest consumers of electricity and resources on a per-capita basis.

Nearly everything you do in a city requires far more energy than the same task carried out in a rural America. Got a job? Your city commute is energy-intensive, even if you ride train. Taking a shower? All that water had to be pumped in using electricity. Shopping for groceries? Look around: None of those food crops were grown inside the city. Filling your gas tank? All the fuel came from rural America, which is where the oil wells and refineries are located.

Despite all the consumption of resources, liberal cities are collapsing into filth and homelessness anyway

What’s really shocking in realizing all this is that, despite the expenditure of all this energy to support the artificial construct of a city, liberal-run cities are collapsing into filth and destitution anyway. The quality of life in liberal cities is imploding, and the streets are being overrun with so much disease and filth that even the famous Dr. Drew is now warning that Los Angeles will see a devastating outbreak of the Bubonic Plague.

In other words, liberal cities use more energy per capita but produce disastrous results in terms of human dignity and ecological sustainability. Cities are simply not sustainable. Cities, by definition, do not function in harmony with the natural environment. And that’s why it’s so bizarre to see city-dwelling liberals proclaim that they are the “defenders” of the planet when they’re actually the ones living in the most ecologically disastrous artificial concrete jungles imaginable.

If you really want to see the annihilation of life and ecology on display, go attempt to cross 12 lanes of a Los Angeles freeway while barefoot. See how far you get, and then imagine what that’s like for a racoon, an iguana or a grasshopper.

Liberals EXPORT all their filth and waste to rural America, dumping their actual s##t on everybody else

Beyond merely consuming more energy and destroying the natural environment, cities also export their feces and filth to rural America. Every toilet that’s flushed in a city results in more human biosludge that’s collected, dehydrated and trucked out of the city to be dumped on rural farmlands.

Watch the trailer for Biosludged below, and visit Biosludged.com to see the full film (or download it in full).

Cities, in other words, export their toxic waste to rural areas, even while depending on rural areas to produce all the imports that cities greedily consume to maintain their own existence that’s wildly out of balance with the natural world. Without electricity, water, fuel, food and other artificial imports, cities would collapse and quickly be consumed by nature as grass, trees and wild animals move in and begin to restore the landscape.

Before any city can be built, Mother Nature must be annihilated first

Understand that cities must constantly murder Mother Nature in order to exist. Cities have to suppress the growth of grasses (i.e. “weeds”), trees and animals in order to continue to function as cities. Twelve lanes of freeway in Los Angeles is not “nature.” It’s an abomination against nature. Burning fossil fuels to pump water over mountains and bring it to a city is not “sustainable.” It’s a pathetic joke against sustainability.

People who live in cities are lying to themselves if they think they’re “saving the planet” by denouncing fossil fuels. Their very existence in a city is an affront to ecological sustainability, and there isn’t a single person living in a city who isn’t directly or indirectly consuming fossil fuels at a rate that’s disastrous for the planet according to their own complaints about sustainability.

Anyone who wants to complain about fossil fuels should first move out of their high-energy apartment and live in a mud hut or a teepee with Elizabeth Warren. Grow your own food (or kill your own wild game), cook your own meals, filter your own water and weave your own clothing textiles. Ditch your car, your iPhone, your air conditioning and your tap water. All those things use non-renewable energy. Swear off grocery stores and stop using the internet, since all websites and streaming services (like Netflix) depend on massive server farms that use electricity that’s mostly generated from coal.

If a woman living in a mud hut, who owns no modern conveniences and has no running water or electricity wants to complain about saving the planet, she has credibility. Everybody else is just a walking, pathetic contradiction.

You progressives really want to save the planet? Shut down the power grid to your own cities, because that’s where the biggest waste of natural resources is actually found. Or if you really want to accelerate the solution and eliminate the people causing the destruction of nature, take yourself skydiving off the roof of a tall building without a parachute — an idea that isn’t far off from the mass lunacy of liberals who will probably soon promote “mass suicide” as the next great thing in saving the planet.

On that point, the rest of us would not necessarily disagree. Darwin Awards await the brave pioneers of the coming “save the planet with suicide” movement…