+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Meteorology & Climatology (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-72.html)
+--- Thread: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? (/thread-7493.html)
Pages:
1
2
The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - C C - Aug 16, 2019
https://quillette.com/2019/08/15/the-bigotry-of-environmental-pessimism/
EXCERPT (Michael Shellenberger): . . . While they are at it, they should condemn the inflammatory rhetoric used by environmentalists, which also may have contributed to the motivations of the El Paso shooting suspect. The suspect justified his mass shooting of people in a Walmart by arguing that “our lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country.” The suspect writes, “y’all are just too stubborn to change your lifestyle. So the next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.”
For over 50 years, environmentalists have argued that a significant down-sizing of American living standards is required to prevent environmental catastrophe. They have been attacking the American lifestyle since the 1960s, and Walmart since the 1990s. The El Paso shooting suspect named his manifesto “The Inconvenient Truth,” a title nearly identical to the 2006 documentary about Al Gore’s slideshow on global warming. In it, Gore says: “The truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means we are going to have to change the way we live our lives.”
Many Democrats and New York Times readers will object that we cannot attribute the El Paso shooting subject’s actions to Gore or to the language he uses. But if that’s true, then we can’t attribute them to Trump and Fox News, either. We can’t have it both ways.
After I made this point on Twitter, some people replied that while the suspect may have had environmental concerns, he acted on his anti-immigrant beliefs. Others said that had he acted on his environmental concerns, he would have shot up ExxonMobil. But such claims demonstrate ignorance of what the shooting suspect wrote, his worldview, and the ways in which it “echoes,” to use the Times’ word, the long history of anti-immigrant, Malthusian environmentalism.
The suspect clearly states that his decision to kill immigrants was, in significant measure, because of their impact on the natural environment. “Of course these migrants and their children have contributed to the problem, but are not the sole cause of it,” he writes. “The American lifestyle affords our citizens an incredible quality of life.”
The El Paso suspect said he was partly inspired by the suspected shooter of Muslim immigrants in New Zealand in March, who also made clear in a manifesto that environmental concerns motivated his anti-immigrant ones. “Why focus on immigration and birth rates when climate change is such a huge issue?” the New Zealand shooting suspect asks. “Because they are the same issue, the environment is being destroyed by overpopulation, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not overpopulating the world.”
It is not surprising that the two manifestos echoed environmentalist ideas. For two centuries, prominent scientists, conservationists, and journalists, have blamed immigrants, the poor, and non-whites for their degradation of the natural environment. Much of what we call “environmentalism” is simply a repackaging of the ideas of 19th-century economist Thomas Malthus... (MORE - details)
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - Syne - Aug 16, 2019
How many leftists are even aware of this part of his manifesto?
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - confused2 - Aug 17, 2019
(Aug 16, 2019 10:48 PM)Syne Wrote: How many leftists are even aware of this part of his manifesto?Again (recently) I am not sure what point you are trying to make.
If the majority of leftists are aware of this part of the manifesto then (say) X follows.
If the majority of leftists are not aware of this part of the manifesto then (say) Y follows.
Can you clarify what you think X and Y actually are?
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - Syne - Aug 17, 2019
(Aug 17, 2019 12:29 AM)confused2 Wrote:(Aug 16, 2019 10:48 PM)Syne Wrote: How many leftists are even aware of this part of his manifesto?Again (recently) I am not sure what point you are trying to make.
If the majority of leftists are aware of this part of the manifesto then (say) X follows.
If the majority of leftists are not aware of this part of the manifesto then (say) Y follows.
Can you clarify what you think X and Y actually are?
Again, this seems either dim or trolling.
Leftists are screaming that the El Paso shooter was a racist inspired by Trump. So they are probably unaware that his manifesto states he felt this way before Trump and detailed his concern for the environment as a motivating factor. Hence, if leftists are aware of it, they are dishonest, and if they are not, they are uninformed.
And they won't talk about the Dayton, Ohio shooter, who was a self-vowed leftist (telling people to "vote blue", as in Democrat) and atheist. Though we have no motive for the latter, aside from the fact that people knew he had a kill list and a rape list, they both seem to be left-ideology-inspired incels.
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - confused2 - Aug 17, 2019
Anyone is invited to point out any misconceptions revealed in what follows..
I think I see Syne's line of argument emerging.
Leftists are motivated by concern for the environment.
The El paso shooter was motivated by concern for the environment therefore the El Paso Shooter was a Leftist.
Malthus was motivated by concern for the environment therefore Malthus was a Leftist.
Both Malthus and the El Paso shooter (both leftists) believed in killing humans as a way to protect the envoronment.
As two leftists believed in killing to support the environment it follows that all leftists are either uninformed or potential killers.
Trump's solution to the Them and Us problem seems to be to build a wall to keep 'Them out. Once the wall is in place They can starve or do whatever else They want to do without bothering Us. Some might be tempted to think they can help by wiping out 'Them' already inside the wall.
Looking at the more general Left/Right situation
It seems the left believe social inequality can only be ameliorated by an enlightened government.
It seems the right believe the rich are the ones best qualified to deal with social inequality.
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - Syne - Aug 17, 2019
Nope. You're still either very dim or just trolling.
Where I clearly said leftists are either "dishonest" or "uninformed", you've erected the straw man of them being "potential killers".
While not advocating killing, many leftists do cite overpopulation as a concern, and some even advocate the cessation of having children (antinatalists) as a solution. It's a relatively small step for the mentally unhinged, who already share those beliefs, to take a more "active" approach.
The El Paso shooter agreed with Trump on the wall, as he believed that keeping illegal aliens out would allow for the leftists policies of universal basic income and universal healthcare. He agreed with Trump, but only to serve leftist goals.
The US is not responsible for the whole world. No country can afford to allow untold numbers of unskilled workers into its economy, who then burden the taxpayers without providing enough tax revenue.
The only inequality the left can hope to solve is by spending/taxing so much (which would be the only way to afford to help foreigners/open immigration) that the US becomes just as much a third-world country as any other. Only free market capitalism allows a rising tide to lift all boats. You're little right>rich equivalency is naive and conspiratorial. The vastly wealthy tech giants are actively working against the right, and many big companies openly pander to the left.
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - confused2 - Aug 18, 2019
Syne Wrote:Where I clearly said leftists are either "dishonest" or "uninformed", you've erected the straw man of them being "potential killers".I was seeking to identify what I thought was your straw man argument.
Syne Wrote:While not advocating killing, many leftists do cite overpopulation as a concern, and some even advocate the cessation of having children (antinatalists) as a solution. It's a relatively small step for the mentally unhinged, who already share those beliefs, to take a more "active" approach.A relatively small step indeed to picking up a gun and opening fire. Once you (or anyone) has a gun it's a relatively small step to picking it up and opening fire - I don't think we can make any progress on that point.
Syne Wrote:The vastly wealthy tech giants are actively working against the right, and many big companies openly pander to the left.Obviously traitors to the cause (of the right).
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - Syne - Aug 18, 2019
(Aug 18, 2019 12:02 AM)confused2 Wrote:Nope. You don't get to justify your obvious straw man by claiming you were somehow "reading between the lines". That's just plain dishonest.Syne Wrote:Where I clearly said leftists are either "dishonest" or "uninformed", you've erected the straw man of them being "potential killers".I was seeking to identify what I thought was your straw man argument.
Quote:Not a small step for the sane, but I did say "for the mentally unhinged". Again, you're erecting a straw man. And no, just owning a gun doesn't make using it a small step. That's ignorance from someone who either doesn't own a gun, is, themselves, mentally unhinged, or both.Syne Wrote:While not advocating killing, many leftists do cite overpopulation as a concern, and some even advocate the cessation of having children (antinatalists) as a solution. It's a relatively small step for the mentally unhinged, who already share those beliefs, to take a more "active" approach.A relatively small step indeed to picking up a gun and opening fire. Once you (or anyone) has a gun it's a relatively small step to picking it up and opening fire - I don't think we can make any progress on that point.
Quote:Where are the loyalists? How are low business taxes, which help produce jobs, the "cause of the right" when supposedly "socialist" Denmark has lower corporate taxes than the US?Syne Wrote:The vastly wealthy tech giants are actively working against the right, and many big companies openly pander to the left.Obviously traitors to the cause (of the right).
It's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about.
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - confused2 - Aug 18, 2019
The introduction of corporate tax rates in 'supposedly socialist' Denmark suggests at least one of us has lost traction. You may claim whatever you want.
RE: The bigotry of environmental pessimism? - Syne - Aug 18, 2019
How else do people supposedly favor "the rich" other than taking less of their money? I guess you couldn't keep up with your own claims.
