The Earth is Mankind's Garden
There is an alternative to the environmentalist argument.
Looking at a figure as basic as life expectancy, it is obvious that people today live a lot longer than they did in the pre-industrialized world of 200 years ago. Today we enjoy such an abundance of foods, medicines and a whole host of labor-saving technologies that if a person from 200 years ago could see us now, he would be amazed that it is even possible that so many human beings can live together for so long and in such splendor.
Yet, the environmentalists tell us the sky is falling. Turning the popular trail mantra "leave no footprint" against all of humanity, the environmentalists say our farms threaten the ecosystem, our cars are destroying the atmosphere and "sprawl" will consume the wilderness. On Earth Day, every aspect of human life and human consumption represents a threat to the Earth.
Cartoon by Cox and Forkum.
Notice, for example, that there is not an existing, practical method of energy production that the environmentalists support. Environmentalists oppose gas, coal, nuclear and hydro power. If the environmentalists were honest, they should love nuclear power, for it clearly has the least ecological impact of all the practical means of generating power.
Yet it is nuclear power that the environmentalists despise the most. Consider the argument that the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in the 1970's is proof that man can not properly harvest the power of the atom. In fact, the accident showed just the opposite. Three Mile Island showed that man could build a reactor that could survive a near total failure, including a hydrogen gas explosion within the reactor core and still have no impact on the surrounding environment. While Three Mile Island was still a costly accident, it showed the strength of our science and technology, not its shortcomings.
Yet the environmentalists still cry "foul." Why? Because the real premise behind Earth Day is that mankind is an unnatural despoiler and a threat to the earth. Of all the creatures that live on the planet, it is rational, tool-making, resource exploiting man that doesn't quite fit.
There is an alternative to the environmentalist argument. It is one that says the Earth is man's garden and that man's mind as fully competent to meet the challenges of living in his garden, whatever those challenges may be. It is an argument that recognizes that the ultimate resource is not oil, coal, caribou or even the energy of the atom. It is an argument that recognizes that the ultimate resource is a free, unfettered human mind.
Email to a friend
Print version
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.The first is that industry and technology has allowed mankind to move into "an era of happiness, health and prosperity." This is a partial truth in that it only applies to part of mankind, namely the part living in First or Second World countries. Much material wealth has come at the expense of those living in third world countries, who do not live in happiness, health, or prosperity. Richness comes at the expense of others, it does not grow simply from itself.
I often see the point about life expectancy raised as well. I agree that modern medicine has done marvels for public health. One thing that most overlook when talking about this is that the major difference in life expectancy between then and now is infant mortality. High infant mortality in the past lowered average life expectancy, but those who lived past a young age lived just about as long as people do now. This is a subtle difference but I still feel it is important that people understand it.
Second, environmentalists as a whole are neither for nor against nuclear power - you will find through reading that they are divided, the same as they are divided on the merits of other alternate forms of energy such as wind or hydroelectric. To group and generalize them to one single viewpoint is dishonest (not to mention that you sneaked in a bit of ad hominem there).
Finally, I am not sure what to make of your closing statements. Though I find it funny since the metaphor of Earth as garden can be seen in a very environmentalist light. Consider that the garden, though you take from it, must also be tended, watered, planted, protected, replenished. Sounds rather environmentalist, no? :)
- pavit singh
Post your comment