Without getting overtly political, I wanted to point out an oddly twisted worldview that seems to me to be prevalent amongst "environmental extremist". I would even say that the definition of an environmental extremist is one who holds this particular view of the world.
Essentially, environmental extremists value all non-human life more than human life. I would contend that many of these extremists would say that they prefer the "natural order of things" to the industrialization of modern society. I don't believe that this is the case. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and admit that they have convinced themselves that they believe this, but ultimately it's not possible for them to believe this.
I'm thinking in particular of two quotes I have heard. The first was from a professor's lecture in which he stated that he looked forward to the time when some super-bacteria (read plague) would wipe out a significant portion of the human race so that the earth could return to the natural state. Another was from an attorney that lamented that DDT had nearly wiped out Malaria in Guyana because it had led to a reduced infant mortality rate which is now contributing to earth's over-population problems. This same attorney also made some inane comment about the morality of killing mosquitoes.
My contention with this worldview is that it is totally self-destructive for no apparent reason. I can understand concern over the environment because we depend on it, but that is really only a thoughtful concern over ourselves. But valuing the environment over human life is not only self-destructive and irrational, it's UNNATURAL.
The natural world is governed by one law: the strong survive. All of the natural world, in fact, the natural universe, is one massive competitive struggle. We all understand this notion when it comes to carnivores: the lion lives because the antelope dies. But consider the tree in the rain forest. That tree is engaged in a fierce competition, arguably more fierce than the lion and the wildebeest. Every hour of every day that tree is competing with all of the other plants around it for sunlight and water. It's branches reach higher to soak up more sun, and it's roots plunge deeper and spread broader to soak up more water. How many thousands, no millions, of trees sprouted at it's feet, only to be strangled, starved, and suffocated? How many of those saplings were seeds from the very tree that strangled them?
The natural order of things demand that we compete ruthlessly without conscience. Man is the only beast which is able to totally dominate all of nature, and yet chooses not to. It is not the natural order of things that environmental extremists desire, it is the absence of man. It is another instance of man rejecting his role as an image-bearer. It is a form of self-hatred that springs from the fall.
I value human life more than any other form. Because human life depends on the environment we must care for it. It is important that caring for the environment for it's own sake be relegated to a secondary priority.
If I valued human life the same as any other form. Then I would find no reason to care for the environment. Our success or failure makes no difference. If we drain the earth of all it's resources, and force ourselves into extinction, what difference does that make? There will be other animals to take our place. The earth with keep spinning. For what reason should I care for my young over any other animals young? If I care no more for humans than mosquitoes, then why should I care whether we use DDT or not? If humans die, so be it. If mosquitoes die, so be it. One of us has to die.
It is only when I value human life LESS than all other animal life that I come to the inane conclusion that we must stop using DDT lest we kill too many mosquitoes. It is only when I value trees more than people that I would consider it a blessing if mankind was wiped out by a plague.
I suppose that all of this is simply to say that environmental extremism is not only totally immoral, it's not only totally irrational, it is also totally unnatural.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It seems only fit that the morons holding that worldview will probably not have kids and pass on their genetic potential for stupidity. Check out this article, wherein it is reported that a bridge was built using only stone and concrete without steel in China in order to ensure "it remained in harmony with the natural environment". The bridge collapsed, killing at least 41.
The statement that man is able to dominate all of nature may be of an overstatement. But you're right when you say that many folks foolishly overvalue things over people.
What may be interesting is if you look at how psychology has examined evolution. It's a different perspective than biology, and psychology has done a better job explaining evolution in groups. It's not necessarily true that individuals only do things to advance their survival. It could be that there are group dynamics that come into play there.
Post a Comment