Featured Image
 Wikimedia Commons

(LifeSiteNews) – Superstar director James Cameron sympathizes with the genocidal villain of the most recent Avengers films, he revealed in a new interview with Time Magazine.

Cameron, the director of hits like Aliens, Titanic, True Lies, and the Avatar and Terminator films, spoke to Time for an interview published February 16 that touched on his environmental activism, during which he revealed, “I can relate to Thanos. I thought he had a pretty viable answer. The problem is nobody is going to put up their hand to volunteer to be the half that has to go.”

Thanos was the ultimate antagonist of the Disney-owned Marvel Studios’ wildly successful “Infinity Saga” series of films, the climax of which saw him obtain the cosmic power to wipe out half of all life in the universe (in Avengers: Infinity War, undone by the heroes in Avengers: Endgame), in the belief that population growth is unsustainable without mass culling – a surprisingly relevant portrayal of evil from a studio that has since defined itself in large part by pandering to “woke” politics. 

Environmentalism factors prominently in Cameron’s Avatar films, which package well-trodden themes about noble indigenous peoples victimized by militaristic seekers of natural resources in elaborate sci-fi spectacle (and are now also owned by Disney via the company’s acquisition of 20th Century Fox). 

The interview details how he mandated vegan-only catering for production of the sequel, The Way of Water, because the crew “grudgingly nodded” at the proposal instead of “want[ing] to start screaming and throwing stuff at” the director. “Whether it occurred to Cameron that one of the 200 crew members might not feel comfortable objecting to their boss is unclear,” the article notes.

Future Avatar installments will depict “an earth decimated by climate change, but none of the movies will actually be set there,” the interview reveals, as Cameron “wants to focus on how to save a planet, not destroy one.”

Cameron’s environmental dogma is widely shared by left-wing elites in media and pop culture, but has little basis in fact.

Population control, for instance, has long been a hobbyhorse of those who argue that neither societies nor ecosystems can sustain population growth indefinitely, but those who have done the most to implement such schemes – at great cost to human rights – have found themselves worse off than they started in many ways.

The Communist Chinese government began implementing its one-child policy of forced abortion and sterilization in 1980, amid fears of food shortages and hopes of cutting the country’s population to under 1.2 billion by the end of the 20th century. But in 2016, concerns that there would be too few young workers to replace and support an aging population led the regime to allow couples to have two children. That concession sparked a brief population spike that year, but it didn’t continue into 2017.

A government study released in July 2018 estimated that the Chinese workforce could decline by 100 million people from 2020 to 2035, and by another 100 million from 2035 to 2050. Additionally, by discriminating against baby girls, China’s draconian policies left fewer women in the population to give birth in the first place, and officials struggling to encourage a baby boom among a citizenry reluctant to provide one. “To put it bluntly, the birth of a baby is not only a matter of the family itself, but also a state affair,” an editorial in the official state newspaper People’s Daily declared in August 2018.

As for anthropogenic global warming (AGW), the view that human activity (rather than cyclical natural phenomena) is primarily responsible for Earth’s changing climate, the evidence has never been as clear as popularly portrayed.

Activists claim there is a “97 percent scientific consensus” in favor of AGW, but that number comes from a distortion of an overview of 11,944 papers from peer-reviewed journals, 66.4 percent of which expressed no opinion on the question; in fact, many of the authors identified with the AGW “consensus” later spoke out to say their positions had been misrepresented.

Further, contrary to claims that people are dying due to “climate change,” data from the International Disasters Database show that “climate related deaths” (i.e., deaths due to floods, droughts, storms, wildfires, and extreme temperatures) have dramatically and steadily declined since the 1920s.

AGW proponents suffered a blow in 2010 with the discovery that their leading researchers at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, East Anglia Climate Research Unit, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had engaged in widespread data manipulation, flawed climate models, misrepresentation of sources, and suppression of dissenting findings.

In March 2019, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore called AGW alarmism a “complete hoax and scam,” a “kind of toxic combination of religion and political ideology” that is “as bad a thing that has happened to science in the history of science.”