Apparently, George R. R. Martin’s destroyers are radical environmentalists. Smashing! We deserve it.
“There are always individuals who pit their minds against the general modes of thought and who are arrogant enough to feel that they alone are right and that the many are wrong.”
― Isaac Asimov, Foundation and Earth
When I was just a wee lad, our homeroom teacher had us learn all about swingin’ sixties biologist, Paul “The Population” Ehrlich.
Ehrlich, preaching to the Un-Converted
Paul-San had the most awesome sideburns ever and predicted that our world would shortly come to an end. This zombie-apocalypse was connected to Paul’s ominous “Population Bomb” which would inevitably go BOOM unless we followed his explicit instructions (forced-sterilization?). And then we might be saved. The fact that we were studying his theories AFTER their apparent expiration date didn’t seem to bother our school administrators one bit. But I can clearly recall thinking that the man was an absolute nutter.
Anyway, planet earth didn’t listen and kept having sex. Lots of it. And fortunately, Paul’s predictions didn’t quite come to fruition. But as we were too busy dealing with all the other end-of-the-world scenarios—who had time to notice?
There was…Acid Rain, Animal Rights, Global Freezing, Ozone Depletion, Saving the Rain Forest, Saving the Whales, Saving the Dolphins, Saving the Clock Tower, Over-Fishing, Over-Foresting, Over-Harvesting, Over-Furring, Over-Eating, Bio-Engineering, Endangered Species, Sally Struthers, Auto-Emissions, DDT, Second-Hand Smoke, Landfill Overflow, Sustainability, Global Warming and when those all stopped working—Climate Change! A far superior brand of bullshit if you ask me since it subsumes everything and can mean—anything. And there’s a ton more that I left out (pun intended) but you get the idea.
And the so-called Conservatives have jumped and chased and salivated as the Flying Spaghetti Marxists have thrown each of these idiocies and more, right at their fat useless pandering Rino-heads. These defenders of liberty ALWAYS allow the other side to set the agenda, the terms and the settlement so that we’re allowed to keep a little bit of our freedom and they just move a tad closer to the Reduce-Reuse-Recycle-Totalitarian state of their dreams.
Now the irony here is that I LOVE nature. In fact, I own around 20 Bonsai trees, have a massive collection of pepper plans, and live in a complex built around a Japanese garden. On my weekends, I drive to the ocean with my telescope so I can view the stars without all this crap in the air. And the aliens like it better there anyway. So what gives? Why am I not an environmentalist?
In fact, I am. I’m just not religious. I don’t follow any faith-based ideology. Even IF I was to believe in an uncaused-cause or some other form of all-powerful being, I would need to be persuaded by reason. And at this stage, there is more evidence for a belief in God then there is for any of the cult-idiocy that these end-of-the-world climate zealots are pushing for. In fact, I don’t even think that they care about the natural world or the environment. If they did, they would be outside the Chinese embassy protesting right now. But the same groups that insisted on a minimum-wage that would necessarily push manufacturing to China—where there are very few enforced regulations—continue to blame America for the world’s environmental ills.
And while I agree that man-made pollution is real and we should have reasonable laws to prevent as much of it as we can—without ending up in the stone age—none of what these fools are predicting IS real. And if it was, they wouldn’t know it. Because they’re not interested in science or the scientific method. Don’t believe me? Plenty of evidence. And for an overview of who did this to us, Check out The Critique of Domination by Trent Schoyer (Trent is going to be so flattered that I’m pinning this on him but I’m not). And I quote the stated goal (from the lovely dust-jacket), “to construct a non-scientistic philosophy of science and non-objectivistic image of knowledge”. Right. Kant, Hegel, Marx and Marcuse make up the boy-band of this new Critical Theory, Cultural Marxist revolution of the MIND, referenced by Trent. And he’s RIGHT, for the wrong reasons. Kant has been after Aristotelian logic ever since he first heard “To Be or Not to Be” and decided on the latter.
But let’s not forget Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He is the father of the modern religious cult of environmentalism. A cult that is currently seeking to jail (or worse) any advocate of the climate-denier heresy. And since we’re on the subject, here is Voltaire’s priceless response to Rousseau’s return-to-nature treatise—The Social Contract: “I have received your new book against the human race, and thank you for it. Never was such a cleverness used in the design of making us all stupid. One longs, in reading your book, to walk on all fours. But as I have lost that habit for more than sixty years, I feel unhappily the impossibility of resuming it.”
It’s interesting to note that many of the environmental “cause célèbre” that I reference above have some basis in reality and connect to some form of the scientific method. But please understand, the FSM doesn’t care about ANY of those causes. Well, their brainwashed minions might. But the great inventors of the anti-industrial, anti-capitalist religions do not. In fact, even now the celebrities and political advocacy groups that lead the way on climate change, fly around the world on private jets and drive SUVs. What does that tell you? Many of these “limousine liberals” waste more in one year than us plebeians could hope to in a full lifetime. And they finance and support industries that are massive polluters. But they’re not hypocrites. They’re just liars. But for a good cause.
The goal here is not a cleaner environment. It never was. The actual goal is the destruction of the Liberal world. The real Liberals. The ones who believe in a limited-government that exists to enshrine the inalienable rights of man. Those liberals. Last one seen was about 100 years ago until the word, in its original Classic recipe, made a recent comeback. Thanks Dave Rubin. Actually, it’s all my idea.
Environmentalism and climate advocacy is NOT about the environment. And these zealots certainly don’t care about MAN and his life on this earth. In fact, their core position is that man is a blight on nature. But how is that possible? What makes man, who is clearly all-natural, somehow an enemy of nature itself? Something doesn’t compute. Well, ask yourself what is different about a man in comparison to a rock or a tree. Answer? MAN THINKS. So the attack here is on the MIND of man. On man as a rational animal. Like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the zealots of climate-change want us back on all fours, barking if possible. Not as good as a rock, but almost.
Don’t buy their crap. They don’t give a flying spaghetti marxist fig-leaf tree about the beauty of the natural world—or how to command, control and modify that beauty as our Japanese friends do. Or Frank Lloyd Wright (who learned from them). They seek to remove MAN qua MAN from this world because of his offense in the original garden itself. To think or Not to think—that is their question and the latter—their answer.