"The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United
States: We can't let other countries have the same number of cars, the
amount of industrialization, we have in the U.S. We have to stop these 3rd
World countries right where they are. And it is important to the rest of the
world to make sure that they don't suffer economically by virtue of our
stopping them."
-Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...."
-The United States Declaration of Independence
Which statement advocates imposing on 3rd World Countries a type of "Eco-
Imperialism" that dictates what their destiny will be? Which statement
allows 3rd World Countries the freedom to choose their future for a better
life?
The Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) are advocating
their Forest Plan Alternative 6, which will protect endangered species by
closing off our forests. As we explained in our past alerts, from 60 to 70
percent of our recreational access would be removed by their road and trail
standards
Their trail and road standards (combined with their fire management
proposals), will handicap management and severely restrict access. The
Forest Service (after public input), did not choose their alternative; if
you read the Sierra Club and the Center for Biodiversity's Alternative 6 you
would understand why it was rejected.
In some ways we should consider ourselves blessed. We are not the only ones
subjected to their "Eco-Socialist" and other policies. We have not suffered
the wide scale deadly effects of their "Eco-Imperialist" policies toward 3rd
World Countries.
As the Sierra Club and their allies in the environmental movement portray
the United States as the source of all evil in the world, it is their
"Eco-Imperialistic" policies, combined with their "Eco-Socialist" Policies
that are denying 3rd World Countries the modern technology that would stop
the death and environmental destruction that they are currently
experiencing. Although political instability and war also contribute to the
destruction and loss of freedom in many 3rd World Countries, many would
greatly benefit from the technology being denied to them by the influence of
the environmental movement.
How does the environmental movement address the problems facing the 3rd
World Countries - such as the lack of safe drinking water and the
deforestation created when forests are cut down for heat and fuel? We have
the luxury of worrying about our environment, a luxury not shared by others
in the undeveloped world that are much more concerned with putting bread on
the table and a roof over their heads (and fuel to heat and cook with).
As I will show in this update, it is not the policies of the United States
that are keeping the world's poor at deaths door, but the policies of the
environmental movement. Many in the environmental movement accuse the United
States of crimes against humanity. As the United States advocates the use of
technology to better the lives of 3rd World Countries, the environmental
movement opposes them. Just who is guilty of crimes against humanity?
In a just world, the environmental movement would be tried for crimes
against humanity for denying the 3rd World Countries the very comforts of
technology they enjoy. Is this not an elitist attitude for these
"Eco-Imperialists" and "Eco-socialists" to have? To deny 3rd World Countries
the freedom that they themselves enjoy? Do American environmental
organizations abuse America's power (aided by the "Eco-Socialist"
governments of Western Europe and the U.N.), by influencing policies that
would deny others the freedom to choose what life saving technologies they
can use? Is this not a type of genocide upon the poor of the world?
Even the people of third world countries understand the benefits of a strong
economy; yet the environmental movement campaigns against economic
development in these areas, which actually increases the degradation and
results in many deaths. Nearly 2 billion people worldwide have no access to
electrical power; they have no choice but to rely on cutting trees and using
animal dung for fuel, which increases pollutants both inside an outside
their shelters affecting air quality and their health.
Recent deadly mudslides in Haiti and the Dominican Republic were caused by
deforestation, which was not the result of logging, but of the cutting of
trees for cooking and heating. Many hours are spent gathering wood and dung
by women and children adding to their burden.
The lack of power also has detrimental effects on the 3rd World Countries
ability to provide waste treatment and clean water, which contributes to
deaths from dysentery and other diseases.
"Wealthy countries want the earth to be green, the underdeveloped countries
want to be fed."
-James Shikwati, director of Kenya's Inter-Regional Economic Network as
quoted in Eco-Imperialism - Green Power Black Death
Although the environmental movement touts "renewable energy, it would take
13,000 wind turbines on thousands of acres to provide the power of one 555
megawatt gas fired power plant on less than ten acres. Plus, wind turbines
have been blamed for increasing the deaths of endangered birds that fly into
the turbines, one of the reasons why environmentalists fought a wind farm
near the home of the endangered California Condor. The efficiency of solar
power is not much different than that of wind turbines and would also
require thousands of acres to match the generating ability of a gas power
plant. Plus, if you don't have wind or you have cloudy or rainy days, this
technology is useless.
"Environmental activists 'romanticize poverty' then they fly to
'eco-summits' like the one in Johannesberg, where they stay in 'five-star
hotels, talking about poverty but not giving options to people who are
actually poor to come out of poverty."
-Barun Mita, President of the liberty institute of Delhi India as quoted in
Eco-Imperialism - Green Power Black Death
The environmental movement denies 3rd World Countries the comforts of modern
technology that their members enjoy - as well as the ability to rise above
their circumstances; in the environmental movement's psyche to do otherwise
would deny the "Green" God.
"I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part
in balancing ecosystems"
-John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal
The environmental movement's opposition to drought and insect resistant
Genetically Modified Crops (GMC) increases water and pesticide use and also
increases erosion. Many of these GMC's are high yield, decreasing the amount
of land in cultivation. Some of these crops also address vitamin
deficiencies that are the cause of much suffering and death. These crops
have been used in the west but denied to the people of 3rd World Countries
by pressure from environmental organizations.
"Zealous researches alleged, for example, that monarch butterflies might be
harmed by biotech corn, which contains a bacterium gene (Bacillus
thuringiensis) that makes the corn toxic to insects to chew on the plants.
They also claimed that feeding transgenic potatoes to rats might damage
their immune systems. Both "studies" were quickly seized upon by the Times
and tabloids to generate hysterical reactions. Both were subsequently
pilloried by scientific panels.
More careful studies found that the number of monarch butterflies and larvae
actually increased in the fields where Bt corn was grown, probably because
the use of pesticides was greatly reduced in those fields. A review of the
potato study concluded that the rat's immune systems were damaged because
they were being fed only potatoes, and their diets were devoid of essential
nutrients."
-As quoted in Eco-Imperialism - Green Power Black Death by Paul Driessen
The well researched and footnoted book further states:
"Opposition to biotechnology is a 'northern luxury,' says Kenyan argronomist
Dr. Florence Wambugo. 'I appreciate ethical concerns, but anything that
doesn't help feed our children in unethical.
Greenpeace co-founder and ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore echoes her sentiments.
Now an outspoken critic of the group he once led, he underscores the 'huge
and realistically potential benefits that genetically modified crops could
bring 'for the environmental and human health nutrition.' He calls the war
on biotechnology and genetically modified organisms (GMO) 'perhaps the most
classic case of misguided environmentalism ' in memory.
'There are no know serious negative impacts from growing or ingesting the
GMO's that have already been distributed,' Moore continues. 'Yet every
half-baked sensationalism and contrivance from activists with no training in
science gets airtime on the evening news. Even the Golden Rice, a GMO that
may help prevent blindness in half a million children a year, is rejected
out of hand by these anti-humanists, who put unfounded fear-mongering ahead
of the worlds poor'"
To further quote from the book:
"James Shikwati, director of Kenya's Inter-Regional Economic Network, raises
additional questions that weigh heavily on the minds of people in his part
of the world.
* Why do Europe's developed countries impose their environmental ethics on
poor countries that are simply trying to pass through a stage they
themselves went through?
* After taking numerous risks to reach their current economic and
technological status, why do they tell poor countries to use no energy, and
no agricultural or pest control technologies that might pose some
conceivable risk of environmental harm?
* Why do they tell poor countries to follow sustainable development
doctrines that really mean little or no energy or economic development?"
To deny economic development is to deny the key to population growth in 3rd
World Countries. In the developed western world, native populations are
declining. In Japan and Italy the dropping of birth rates is becoming a
national crisis. In the majority of western countries, it is immigration
that is responsible for population growth. Why is this?
In most third world countries your children are your social security. With
high rates of infant and adult mortality, and the lack of modern farming and
manufacturing methods, large families are the norm and needed to insure
someone survives to take care of you when you are old. Think of our own
history during the first 125 years of our country in which farmer's
preferred large families.
In Western countries, technology allows us to provide for our needs
efficiently without intense labor. Modern technology has raised life
expectancies and lowered infant mortality, making large families
unnecessary. Of course some of the population growth in 3rd world countries
is driven by local customs or religious beliefs, but with education this can
and has been addressed.
As explained by Berkeley Professor of Energy and Resources Jack Hollander in
the introduction to his book "The Real Environmental Crisis: Why Poverty,
Not Affluence, Is the Environment's Number One Enemy":
"One of the greatest success stories of the recent half-century is, in fact,
the remarkable progress the industrial societies have made, during a period
of robust economic growth, in reversing the negative environmental impacts
of industrialization. In the United States the air is cleaner and the
drinking water purer than in any time in five decades; the food supply is
more abundant and safer than ever before; the forested area is the highest
in three hundred years; most rivers and lakes are clean again; and largely
because of technological innovation and the information revolution,
industry, buildings and transportation systems are more energy - and -
resource efficient than anytime in the past. This is not to say that the
resource/environment situation in the United States is near perfect or even
totally satisfactory - of course it is not. Much needs to be done. But
undeniably, the improvements have been remarkable.
The media have played a major roll in encouraging the growth of
environmental pessimism and technophobia by focusing on worst-case, doomsday
scenarios in reporting environmental subjects and consistently underplaying
the remarkable progress being made by the affluent societies in enhancing
the quality of the environment.
The real enemies of environmental progress are poverty and tyranny, not
technology or global markets. On the contrary, technological innovation
enabled by affluence and freedom are a major source of the environmental
progress already made by the industrial societies, and the global
penetration of innovative technologies will most likely be a crucial
ingredient for achieving a future sustainable environment throughout the
world. Unfortunately, the reality of environmental progress and promise is
obscured by the doomsday rhetoric propounded in recent years by many
environmental groups and amplified by the media...
Typical of today's environmental pessimism, these doomsday pronouncements
contain grains of truth imbedded in a sea of exaggeration. Without jumping
ahead into the details of the scientific subjects they encompass, which is
the task of subsequent chapters, I assert here that such broad brush
statements mislead the public and, in some instances, are scientifically
inaccurate. For example, they usually represent environmental quality as
rapidly deteriorating, which is not the case. They usually represent the
earth's productive capacity as rapidly diminishing, which is not the case.
The usually represent population growth as a global threat, which is not the
case. And they usually represent global warming as definitely linked to
human activities, which has not been established. Countering such
environmental pessimism with factual basis for environmental optimism is one
of the objectives of this book."
I suggest everyone read this well researched and documented book.
"In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large
areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead
fish."
-Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)
Where will you place your trust? In the environmental movement that views
mankind as a pox on the world; it wishes us to return to the Stone Age and
advocates policies deadly to 3rd World Nations - or in mankind's ability,
through freedom and technology, to overcome the threats we have faced.
Is the environmental movement's policy of "Eco-Imperialism" and
"Eco-Socialism," which has opposed the development of 3rd World Countries,
their chosen future for us? What have their actions shown...?
Their actions have shown that the environmental movement, originally founded
for good purposes, is in its current state morally and ethically bankrupt.
It is an elite ideology in which the failed Socialist policies of doomed
regimes have found a home. It is an ideology that hates mankind and
dismisses the needs of the world's poor, apathetic to the cycle of death and
poverty that is their reality. The ideology of the environmental movement
denies 3rd World Countries the technology to choose their destiny and
instead it promises them a life of living hell.
It this not a crime against humanity? Is this not genocide against the
worlds poor?
"I have long believed that the guiding hand of Providence did not create
this new nation of America for ourselves alone, but for a higher cause: the
preservation and extension of the sacred fire of human liberty. The
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of these United States are
covenants we have made not only with ourselves, but with all of mankind. Our
founding documents proclaim to the world that freedom is not the sole
prerogative of a chosen few, they are the universal right of all God's
children."
-Ronald Reagan (1991)
You are being given the opportunity to protect your freedom to access your
public lands by commenting on the future of your forests; please take this
responsibility seriously.
We will be evaluating and commenting on the forest plans before the comment
period ends in August. We will be releasing these comments to our supporters
to evaluate with an email address to the Forest Planning Team so you can
comment too. Please do your part to protect your access by visiting our web
site for this information or sign up on our email list to be kept informed
on the forest plans.
If you missed our past Forest Plan Updates:
What's at Stake Part I (fire management)
What's at Stake Part II (roads/Access)
What's at Stake Part III (mountain biking)
What's at Stake Part IV (Vision)
What's at Stake Part V (The Wildlands Project)
What's at Stake Part VI (Ideology/economic and governmental)
What's at Stake Part VII (Ideology / Nature)
you can view them by clicking on the "view recent forest plan alerts" drop down list on the top of this page.
 |
Copyright© The Warrior's Society® |
|