Posted on 03/18/2016 3:51:12 PM PDT by truthfinder9
I had a long interview the other day with a reporter from World Magazine about the current trend to push global warming hysteria in youth fiction. That got us into a discussion of how anti-humanism infests the environmentalist movement. It wasn't always like that. From the story by Melinda Taylor:
Piquing students' interest in science and the environment is a good thing, said Wesley J. Smith, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism. Growing up in Los Angeles in the 1950s, Smith remembers the smog that prevented him from seeing the mountains while he played outside on summer days. The smog made his lungs hurt, he told me, and he's glad environmentalists "pursued human thriving" to succeed at making California's air and rivers cleaner.
But students reading books with environmental themes need to understand that showing respect for human worth and dignity goes hand-in-hand with showing respect for the environment, Smith said. The same technology said to impose negative effects on the earth also gives hope to people trying to survive.
Taylor notes the financial incentives offered by the University of California system to push the warming agenda, a matter of which I was unaware and I live in the California. I brought up how anti-humanism has infested much of the fictional work in this area, such as the 2008 remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still:
Smith referenced another movie, The Day the Earth Stood Still, starring Keanu Reeves in a remake of the 1951 original. "The way the movie ends, in the first version, the alien comes to have affection for humankind but warns we should get our act together and become peaceable," Smith said. The new version "reflects this idea that we are the enemies of the planet" and that we must pay for our wrongdoing by "ceasing technology," he said. The movie doesn't take into account that human survival depends largely on the technologies we have developed, he noted.
That movie is so telling! Here's a piece I wrote with a more detailed take on green anti-humanism at the movies. See also my ebook, The War on Humans.
The reason I oppose the growing anti-humanism in environmental advocacy isn't because I oppose good environmental policy, but because good practices require human thriving and prosperity. Calling us a cancer doesn't cut it.
What would you expect from aging childless liberals that are just watching other peoples’ spawn inherit the Earth? It has become a pseudo-religion for a growing number of whites with nothing to live for and nothing to die for; it gives them a false sense of purpose in their lives (and a justification for their decision not to breed - at least for those that had a choice).
Over the years I’ve heard liberals say things like it would be wonderful if a plague killed half or two-thirds or some other number of humans. I believe they see themselves unaffected (or infected) living the same lives to the same standards but everything will be cleaner and brighter and less polluted. Well the populations of the advanced nations is dropping like a stone. The native western populations are below replacement and the westerners are being replaced by a youth bulge from other cultures, notably Muslims. Our population drop is creating a vacuum and the people who will fill it are not the type you will feel comfortable or safe living around. (But, but, diversity! Yeah. Diversity means you will not be as safe as you were before.)
That huge population drives innovation and keeps prices down. What would a cell phone cost if there wasn’t a huge market clamoring for them? A lot more, if they were available at all. Who would grow, harvest and ship the products we take for granted? Who will deliver them to stores and stock those stores?
Be careful what you wish for, liberals. (Not you kearnyirish2.) You just might get it.
Ifests? Heck, that’s what they’ve always been about. Eugenics.
Infests. ^^^
Sorry. Tablet typing drives me nuts.
The hatred of man and his achievements, and the distrust of reason displayed by the environmental movement are a psychological projection of the many contemporary intellectuals self-hatred and distrust of their own minds. Also, they accept the fundamental premise that nature possesses intrinsic value and is a value in itself apart from all contribution to human life and well-being.
Protect separation of powers and separation of church and state along with freedom of religion above all!!!
Yeah. I hear liberals talk about how humanity needs to be killed off. They never think they they themselves will be for the chopping block. The “reduced civilization” will still need plumbers and engineers. College Professors, not so much.
My area (northeastern NJ) is Ground Zero for exactly what you describe; primitive Third Worlders replacing the void left by dwindling European populations. Aztecs, Incas, Saracens, and Moors are replacing the people who built this place, and they aren’t keen on upkeep/maintenance - American taxpayers elsewhere are expected to pay for that.
Very Third World; liberals don’t worry about it if they don’t have children/grandchildren that will suffer the consequences. It isn’t like they live or shop near these populations.
It is interesting how many liberals reject original sin a la Christianity, then apply inherited sin to all Caucasians for industrialization and modern technology as a crime against Mother Earth and other races.
Thanks for posting this TF. Terrific article.
Very true; good point. Without industrialization/modern technology, Earth would be supporting a fraction of the people it now sustains.
Very true; good point. Without industrialization/modern technology, Earth would be supporting a fraction of the people it now sustains.”
And the wailing libtards that apparently wish to return to more primitive times would be the first to miss their phones and tablets and laptops. Those living a more simpler life in the heartland, the bitter clingers, would be more content watching a sunset instead of TV and attending a church social of some kind rather than needing texting and FB.
Peoplephobia.
Maybe the “anti-humanism” environmentalist will take the cue from the “white privilege” crowd that advocates suicide to rectify the problem.
They also assume they’d be among those chosen to be fed when Earth can provide for a smaller population; I don’t think they understand that in a low-tech, agrarian society the most useless thing is a yuppie.
When the Khmer Rouge came to power they worked their yuppies to death farming.
At least they found a use for the useless trash. You have to give them that.
I wouldn’t say their Kampuchea was an improvement over Cambodia; they still haven’t recovered from that purge. I just think those that want a pristine Earth all to themselves should understand that in such a primitive society they are useless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.