Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unsustainable - It’s the third world, not the West
NRO ^ | Jerry Taylor

Posted on 08/28/2002 10:14:15 AM PDT by gubamyster

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: cogitator
Civil society is an expression of property in its broadest sense, and property is only possible within civil society. The two absolutely depend on each other. The origins of the British Parliament lie in the old Saxon (pre-Norman) Witan, as a council established by the property owners to undertake works in common; much like the owners of apartment units have a body corporate to take care of the garden, the elevator and the foyer. Private property, which is the foundation stone of capitalism only has a value because it is protected by civil society.

When the United States was born, Kings ruled all of Europe, China and Japan were governed by an Emperor; neither Germany nor Italy existed and the French revolution was 13 years in the future. Those countries have gone through half a dozen forms of government since, including fascism and communism. The story is even worse in Argentina and Brazil. Is it any wonder that their ecosystems are a mess?

The countries who signed every resolution in Rio and who will sign every document in Johannesburg are even now sinking into the depths of environmental catastrophe. The one country who won't will not. The reason is simple: resolutions don't alter their domestic policies or economic allocations. They will founder. The United States will prosper -- and be cleaner than they all are.

In the final analysis, the greatest environmental document of all time is the US Constitution. Without it, or something like it, there is no hope for sustainable development or social equity.
21 posted on 08/29/2002 5:20:20 AM PDT by wretchard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
I think that's the chief failing of Bush Administration foreign policy in this arena;
Your position then predicates that it's also the chief foreign policy failing of the Clinton administration, the Bush administration, the Reagan administration, the Carter administration, the Ford administration...from 1970...the Nixon administration and possibly even the Johnson administration.
Did I miss any?
22 posted on 08/29/2002 6:01:56 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wretchard; RJayneJ
#21 = Post of the day.
23 posted on 08/29/2002 9:45:20 AM PDT by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: gubamyster
Most of the environmental damage today does happen in less developed countries, including the communist and formerly communist countries. But many environmental problems are due to those countries trying to catch up with the developed world. If it's a West vs. the rest debate, the West wins, because it's been more able to combine economic success with environmental care. But if it's a judgement of the drive to mass consumption affluence that's sought, the answer isn't so easy.

As for the larger economic question, markets work to distribute resources, but they don't always come up with the "right" answer in all cases. This is basically a political debate. The UN wants to get what we have, one way or another. Cato wants us to keep it. What the enviromental results will be remains to be seen.

We aren't responsible for pollution in other countries, but Cato goes too far in separating the clean "us" from the dirty "them." That dirty state is something they go through, and something we went through, in hopes of attaining the affluence Cato celebrates.

24 posted on 08/29/2002 10:27:53 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Thanks for the nomination! };^D)
25 posted on 08/29/2002 12:27:50 PM PDT by RJayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wretchard
Without it, or something like it, there is no hope for sustainable development or social equity.

Just wanted to note that I totally agree. You have to have democracy and a civil (rule of law) society to have economic prosperity and environmental protection -- and they go hand-in-hand. However, while there are clearly foul miscreants, there are also many Third World countries that lack the resources that the United States was/is blessed with to foster economic development. What should be done about them? Particularly those countries that have notable environmental resources worth preservation. Primary on that list would be tropical island nations with coral reefs that are threatened by overfishing and everyday pollution (i.e., untreated sewage and excess nutrients).

26 posted on 08/29/2002 1:11:43 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RJayneJ; Southack
Southack made the nomination, not I.
27 posted on 08/29/2002 4:50:15 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Oops... I clicked the wrong reply button. I was trying to let Southack know that I had made a copy of the nominated quote. Sorry... };^C)
28 posted on 08/29/2002 7:42:50 PM PDT by RJayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


The Birth of Plenty: How the Prosperity of the Modern World was Created by William Bernstein

29 posted on 11/30/2004 10:11:26 AM PST by SunkenCiv ("All I have seen teaches me trust the Creator for all I have not seen." -- Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson