Monday, September 04, 2006

Why environmentalists are mental

This has been an internal rant for a while, and I thought I'd let it all out right now, instead of having it locked up inside of me. Without being too wishy washy about it, let me say it straight:

Environmentalism is bullshit.

Life is not sacred. Life feeds on life, and all higher beings have to kill in order to live. There are degrees, but that's the golden rule. Vegetables are living things too. How come we don't care about them, but only for certain animals, especially those that possess huge quantities for fur, or those that we see our own likeness in?

Nature is brutal. I'm sure you've all seen (vicariously) proud tigers killing deers and antelopes on TV, poisonous frogs, snakes, sharks, crocodiles, and piranas. Such predatory games can be found in all walks of life. There's nothing new about it. We've changed. There's been a gradual disneyfication of our life, the brutalities far removed, sterilised, and televised.

We've all been given fantastic numbers by environmentalists on the rate at which species that are dying out, and yes, those pandas are cute, but you gotta ask yourself, when was dying not kosher to life? What the fuck happenned to the dinosaurs, or the links between the ape and the homosapien?

The concept of harmony or "balance" is bullshit. Nature puts forth a game of gene roulette, and these intergroup tournaments are being played out all the time, as we speak. There are winners and there are losers. Life improvises and cleanses itself, as it has over millions of years. Who the hell are we to play interventionists?

Even if you take selfishness into account, and argue that we need these beings in order to protect the ecosystem that we eventually rely on, guess what, no matter what we do at this point, we're just pussyfooting about. There needs to be a Pol Pot for every square mile on this planet for humanity to go back to a point where we're not a threat other species. There is no way out, and there is no turning back.

Guess what, all life is adaptive right down to bacteria and virii. Bacteria get a lot more chances to come up with cool stuff, cause well, they get a lot more chances. Now we have to contend with bacteria strains that escape the pincers of antibiotics. Chemists have to come up with new antibiotics to fight these resistant strains. In this game, bacteria will always come on top.

Then you've got the whole global warming argument. To those folks, I present global dimming. Apparently, there's been a force counteracting global warming, and emission controls will very soon remove the dust cover that we have protecting us from the actual effects of global warming. That means we should all continue polluting if we are to survive.

Environmentalism exploits the power of myth, it's in our instincts to dream of a garden of eden, or a utopian land, where we're all happy and without any conflict. That's one of the best selling points of heaven. Both heaven and eden are manmade constructs. We've had it so good in the last century that we think we're the masters of the universe. We're not. We're barely in control of the world we live in. And when we embellish ourselves into other living things, we get self righteous collectives of pricks like PETA and Greenpeace.

7 comments:

Mister Anonymous said...

The article on global dimming says that it causes droughts in Africa and flooding in South east asia. So should you keep on polluting?

I think I know why you wrote this article. I bet you mush have been stung by a bee or a wasp recently. I hope it is a wasp. I really hope you have a big blemish right on your forehead.

Sriram said...

You choose: Droughts in africa vs global heatdown and melting of the polar icecaps, flooding of all coastal civilisations, rise in average ocean temperature unleashing noxious methane gases that are in liquefied in the ocean floor... we're fucked either way.

Mister Anonymous said...

So did a bee/wasp sting you?

Sriram said...

Lol u r funny man. no.

Mister Anonymous said...

I am a bit of an environmentalist myself. I avoid paper and plastic, I switch off my car at signals, I I insist everyone around me to do the same. After years of doing this I have come to believe that these little things can really help.

Another point is that sooner or later we will switch to greener sources of power. This is NOT going to happen because of environment issues but more so of economic issues. I know nuclear power is clean (we'll worry about its waste in a later discussion).

Do you really think that all that I have been doing is a waste of time?

Maya2in1 said...

While there can be exagerations on both sides, I honestly believe that if the human race wants to have a chance of survival we'd better think a bit about the far linked consequences of our actions and be environmentalists. If you on the contrary consider that humanity deserves to be eliminated by nature ,then your arguments are valid ...
The sea Aral is almost dry because of human pollution, to produce 1 kg of meat takes several kgs of vegetables ( soja- whose culture is eliminating other nature),developed countries live in a way that would take the resources of several planets earth if everybody lived that way, forests are destroyed and with it regeneration of oxygen... It's true that nobody knows for sure what will happen exactly as consequence, but a guess is that life in harmony with the environment instead of exploitation is the best solution.
By the way, in nature it's the harmony and the collaboration that wins- if you include microorganisms in your perspective. ( Even the tiger's mouth is kept clean by them...)

Siddharth said...

so lets strew plastic all over the place ..hooraayy!! lets clog our oceans with millions of blue and yellow plastic bags..lets add some colour to the lives of those loser fish! lets destroy forests.. who needs green lungs anyway..
basically lets accelerate our own extinctions! Why not?