You noticed that throughout that last post, I referred to those that look after the concerns of the planet with quotes, as “environmentalists.” That’s because I do not believe most of them are truly as concerned about the environment as they claim to be. Some, I believe, don’t give a rat’s you-know-what about the environment at all.
You see, environmentalism has its roots in, and is similar in philosophy to, Marxism, socialism, and Communism.
“Hang on there, Turbo,” I can hear some of you asking. “Are you actually fixing your mouth to say that environmentalists are Communists?” Well, that’s over-simplifying the point, but, largely, yes.
Let’s dive into history, shall we? A “Back-to-Nature” movement, which anticipated the romantic ideal of modern environmentalism, was advocated by intellectuals such as John Ruskin, William Morris, George Bernard Shaw and Edward Carpenter, who were all against consumerism, pollution and other activities that were harmful to the natural world. (1) The movement was a reaction to the urban conditions of the industrial towns, where sanitation was awful, pollution levels intolerable and housing terribly cramped. Idealists championed the rural life as a mythical Utopia and advocated a return to it. John Ruskin argued that people should return to a small piece of English ground, beautiful, peaceful, and fruitful. We will have no steam engines upon it . . . we will have plenty of flowers and vegetables . . . we will have some music and poetry; the children will learn to dance to it and sing it.[2)
The only surprising thing here is that Karl Marx didn’t write it first.
The environmental movement really got ramped up in the 1960s. Rachel Carson’s book SilentSpring called attention to the dangers of DDT spray, and the resulting concern led to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 (hey, look, a new government program to cure some ills, under a Republican president, SMH). Also in 1970, the first Earth Day was celebrated – in San Francisco, of course, an American city that deeply desires to be its own Communist country.
The Sierra Club has been the single most influential environmental group so far in the 21st century. Their motto, though they will never admit it out loud, is BANANA – Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone. There’s not a single construction site in America that hasn’t endured a lawsuit or threat to a lawsuit from this group, as everything that could ever possibly be built will absolutely destroy the environment, according to them. If you aren’t drinking their Kool-Aid, you can see that what they really oppose is capitalism. One of the biggest, and least talked about, blunders of the George W. Bush administration was the push for ethanol as an alternative fuel. This was fuel to be made out of corn. This could have contributed to food shortages and all kinds of ecological damage. But because it was supposed to be away to de-emphasize use of oil, environmentalists didn’t raise much objection.
Here in my part of the world, we have the aforementioned Southern Environmental Lawsuit Center. I truly hate these people. They don’t do anything but sue people, especially my employer. This is one of the driving forces behind the mindset that the only solution to coal ash is dig it up and take it somewhere else. They don’t care about the damage it will cause (see “How Many Trucks” article in the last post), they don’t care it will double the cleanup costs, and of course, every “somewhere else” we have identified has been met with more lawsuits from these goons.
There you have it. “Environmentalism” is rooted in Socialism, Communism, and anything else you want to call opposition to capitalism.
But wait, I’m not done yet.
I profess to be a Christian. I know a lot of people do. As such, the ultimate standard for me is the Bible. The Bible has a standard for human interaction with the environment, and it’s not exactly what you might think. Genesis 2:15 says, “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” To me, that says that God expects us to take good care of the Earth. “Environmentalists” will surely agree with this. However, this is where they will look for spears to throw at me: Humans are more important than animals. Did I just actually say that? Yes I did, and here is my Biblical backing – Genesis 1:26 says “Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” And just in case you think something might have gotten lost in 3,000 years of translation, look at verse 28. “God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” Clearly, we are to take the best care of the land we can, but if push comes to shove, humans are more important than land or animals.
You see, as “environmental” groups continually file suit and protest every capitalistic activity ever conceived, they usually do so under the premise of destruction to a certain species of plant or animal, which they say will totally destroy quality of life if this form of life were to become extinct. They even do this to environmentalist projects. A solar farm in the Mojave desert was held up for years by an “environmental” group that claimed construction of the farm would eliminate some obscure insect from existence. As Governor-at-the-time Arnold Schwarzenegger said, “if we can’t build a solar farm in the desert, I don’t know where the hell we’re going to build it.” A solar farm sounds like a good way to combat global warming, but even something this environmentally friendly gets the BANANA treatment from other “environmentalists” – in other words, Socialists or Communists.
OK, I’ll let all that sit and marinate for a while.