The Dark Side of The Earth Day
To get you in the mood for Earth Day, here's a classic rant by the late George Carlin (warning: he swears).
LDS doctrine teaches that we are stewards over the Earth. We will be held accountable for what we do here, whether we make the desert blossom as a rose, or turn fertile river valleys back into deserts. The most powerful scriptural backing for why we should care for the Earth is found exclusively in LDS scripture.
So I care about Earth, and think we should take care of it. Unfortunately there's a dark side to "going green."
Some think, for example:
"To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem."
"We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age."
"The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."
(Source: Frightening Quotes From Environmentalists)
These people have murder and hatred in their hearts. Is there a way to love our neighbors and take care of the Earth? How can we do this without giving more power and credence to people with destructive ulterior motives?
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, in his book How Capitalism Saved America
, pinpointed that the problem is between conservationists and environmentalists:
We need to be active conservationists, not meddling environmentalists.
You may think that industry is to blame for the polluted state of the Earth. But that's a myth. In reality, it is actually government that is responsible for most environmental disasters.
Desertification, deforestation, and overfishing, for example, are examples of the tragedy of the commons, e.g., state-sponsored communism. These problems would not exist if clear property rights were established.
Desertification is serious, by sharing communal grazing lands, humans created the Sahara desert. A recent example of this has occurred in communized portions of Zimbabwe.
Deforestation occurs when there is no private ownership of forests. If a logging company owns the land, they will cut trees in moderation, and replant trees to keep up the value of the land. Even if the trees won't mature for 100 years, the land-owning logger will plant them, because it will increase the value of his property, so he will be able to sell it for more if he decides to retire, or it will be valuable enough to pass on to his kids.
If he does not own the land, but leases it from the government, he has no incentive to maintain the value of the land. He just wants to cut down as many trees as he can before his lease is up.
Ocean and river communism, which causes overfishing, is a difficult, but not impossible, problem.
Even the most recent BP oil spill was a mess created by government warping economic incentives. Indeed, BP was the biggest victim of the big spill.
Industry isn't inherently harmful to the environment, and when it is, it is usually with the help of the government.
"Going green" isn't a simple issue. We could simplify it by bombing ourselves into the stone age like some eco-freaks want. We could interfere with voluntary business transaction, thus making ourselves poorer and less free. Or we could be frugal with the resources we have, and expect others to be as wise with their money as we are.
If you still want more, here's a Ted talk on how the market helps rivers and streams:
LDS doctrine teaches that we are stewards over the Earth. We will be held accountable for what we do here, whether we make the desert blossom as a rose, or turn fertile river valleys back into deserts. The most powerful scriptural backing for why we should care for the Earth is found exclusively in LDS scripture.
So I care about Earth, and think we should take care of it. Unfortunately there's a dark side to "going green."
"To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem."
"We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age."
"The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."
(Source: Frightening Quotes From Environmentalists)
These people have murder and hatred in their hearts. Is there a way to love our neighbors and take care of the Earth? How can we do this without giving more power and credence to people with destructive ulterior motives?
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, in his book How Capitalism Saved America
, pinpointed that the problem is between conservationists and environmentalists:"Environmentalists are not conservationists, who devote time and money to improving fish and wildlife habitats; planting trees; cleaning up parks, streams, and neighborhoods; and doing much else. Rather, the environmental movement—which is composed of intellectuals, journalists, think-tank "policy wonks," government bureaucrats, politicians, lobbyists, and others—try to use politics to block the production of goods and services."
The key is that environmentalists use the power of the state to force others to "be good." But many of the laws and regulations passed to control businesses are unscientific, and may make things worse. They also slow the progress of industry, the same industry that has made it possible for 6 billion people to live and eat. Slowing that progress will inevitably worsen the problems of poverty and malnutrition.
We need to be active conservationists, not meddling environmentalists.
Desertification, deforestation, and overfishing, for example, are examples of the tragedy of the commons, e.g., state-sponsored communism. These problems would not exist if clear property rights were established.
Desertification is serious, by sharing communal grazing lands, humans created the Sahara desert. A recent example of this has occurred in communized portions of Zimbabwe.
Deforestation occurs when there is no private ownership of forests. If a logging company owns the land, they will cut trees in moderation, and replant trees to keep up the value of the land. Even if the trees won't mature for 100 years, the land-owning logger will plant them, because it will increase the value of his property, so he will be able to sell it for more if he decides to retire, or it will be valuable enough to pass on to his kids.
If he does not own the land, but leases it from the government, he has no incentive to maintain the value of the land. He just wants to cut down as many trees as he can before his lease is up.
Ocean and river communism, which causes overfishing, is a difficult, but not impossible, problem.
Even the most recent BP oil spill was a mess created by government warping economic incentives. Indeed, BP was the biggest victim of the big spill.
Industry isn't inherently harmful to the environment, and when it is, it is usually with the help of the government.
"Going green" isn't a simple issue. We could simplify it by bombing ourselves into the stone age like some eco-freaks want. We could interfere with voluntary business transaction, thus making ourselves poorer and less free. Or we could be frugal with the resources we have, and expect others to be as wise with their money as we are.
If you still want more, here's a Ted talk on how the market helps rivers and streams:
Comments
Post a Comment