Cap'n Arbyte's
Main page

FAQ
Biography
Contact
Essays
Zany stuff
Blog archives

RSS

Advertisements


Blogroll

Environmentalist Article Discussion

Every so often, one of my co-workers sends me an article to look at that she thinks I might enjoy (where "enjoy" can be either good or bad.) Sometimes I'm not drawn in by them, but usually I am, and one recent one succeeds in pushing lots of my buttons simultaneously.

The article is from the Feb. 2004 Harper's Magazine, The Oil We Eat by Richard Manning (print-friendly).

The task I've appointed to myself today is to write a statement about this article. As I've said before, when I'm in a flippant mood I'll describe myself as anti-environmentalist, but it's more accurate to say I'm anti-environmentalism. There are actually two kinds of environmentalism — one good, one bad — one based on the value of human life, the other on the rejection of that premise.

Environmentalism has become thoroughly polluted with the anti-human mentality, and the linked article is an example of it. Yet environmentalism has a veneer of respectability because people give it the benefit of the doubt and ascribe good motives to its advocates, despite how many times the mask has slipped.

A group of co-workers will be having a discussion about this article on (hopefully) July 10th. I will prepare my comments today but will not post them until after the discussion takes place.

Tiny Island