Liberals Believe Humanity is the Scourge of the Planet

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, in yet another example of how the human race is despicable and is a blot on the planet -- and if you doubt me, this is what the animal rights movement believes. The animal rights movement is leftist. All of these movements are. This is the thing. Liberalism has been so good at disguising itself and trying to make itself look like it's apolitical. I mean, what little kid would think an animal rights group has anything to do with politics?

What little kid would think an environmental group has anything to do with politics? All they're trying to do is save the ice for the polar bears. "God, Mom, stop destroying the planet! You and Dad... (sniffle) You and Dad are driving these big cars and you're doing all these bad things and you're destroying the polar bears! Look at that picture," and they flash a Photoshopped picture from Algore's movie of a giant polar bear on three-square feet of ice and making it look like that's all the ice left at the North Pole.

Of course the polar bear's gonna die, and we humans are killing the polar bear, and there's no wonder no kid would consider that's political. It's an animal rights group! It's about love of animals and how we should protect 'em because they're so lovable and they can't take care of themselves and we have to do it. "But we're killing them, Mom! We're killing them. You and Dad are killing them!" This is how it starts.

And then after that little kid goes, turns on Saturday morning cartoons and sees Captain Planet, a feature popularized by Ted Turner, and it's about a guy trying to save the world from evil corporations, companies that have big smokestacks and pollute things. To little kids, none of this is political at all. Not even just little kids. To a number of people who think they're brilliant, sophisticated, elite leftists, it's not politics.

Well, the animal rights people happen to think -- and we've documented this over the 25 years of this program -- that the biggest problem Planet Earth faces is the human race. Dr. Paul Ehrlich, ditto. Many leftist scientists believe that the blight on this planet is humanity. You see, we're not permitted to be considered a part of nature. Animals, they're pure nature. Insects, rats, plants, sharks, 15-foot-long alligators?

All natural and all legitimate and all justified in what they do, 'cause they are inherently decent and good. You know why? "Because they're not prejudiced, and they're not racist, and they're not bigoted, and they're not destroying the planet, either. Not like we are!" So the biggest blight on the planet is the human being. Now, I imagine there are some of you out there listening who may not be regular listeners.

You may tune in now and then and you think, "This guy's cockeyed. This guy Limbaugh really is out there." No, folks, I am just telling you. I'm a polymath. I'm omnivorous in what I read, and I'm telling you what I read. I'm not making this stuff up. "Yeah, but, Rush, those are just extremists." No, they're not. There's no such thing as a leftist extremist, unless you want to say all that leftism/liberalism is extreme.

I mean, these are people that deny the Keystone pipeline and deny water to the Central Valley of California to protect animals. Oh, have you heard about this, by the way? The Hetch Hetchy project is what provides water to San Francisco. You've heard of Hetch Hetchy? (interruption) Well, it's a reservoir. It's over near Yosemite. El Capitan! Well, it's not near he El Capitan but it's near Yosemite.

Hetch Hetchy built pipes, if you will, and Hetch Hetchy water is diverted to San Francisco. Well, it's also diverted to the farmers in the Central Valley. The people of San Francisco are wild environmentalist wackos, but they will not do with a reduction in the amount of water they get. Nooo! While everybody else is supposed to cut back, while everybody else is supposed to behave because of the drought, not San Francisco.

It's one of the biggest hypocrisies that you can find in America. All of these leftists who publicly proclaim what all the rest of us must do to save the country, to save the planet, to accommodate the drought? You let them face one cut back, and Nancy Pelosi gets in gear and kills it. By the same token, the Central Valley has had to do with 15% less water because of the drought, and they're in trouble.

Farmers are really hurting in the Central Valley. San Francisco is not. But one of the reasons that the Central Valley is also being impacted is that farmers are being told they can't farm as much as they used to because there might be a kangaroo rat there, or snail darter. This is real. Human beings, with liberals in charge, must take a backseat to nature. We are never to be part of nature.

I'll give you another example. Life for all life forms is about adapting. In order for a species or an individual to survive, that species or individual must adapt to whatever circumstances happen. The idea of changing the circumstances... For example, if there is global warming, there's nothing we can do about it. We have to adapt, and those that fail to adapt will die out, in terms of species.

It's just the way of nature. It may sound cruel and mean; it's just the way it is. Now, we humans have an amazing ability to adapt. I once, in a conversation on this program, was talking to a guy who believed the idea that dolphins were smarter than we are. Snerdley, you might remember this. You might have screened this call. You might have. This guy was dead serious. He really believed. He had read it. He had heard about it.

"Dolphins are much more advanced intellectually than we are. We just are unable to understand their language. But they have sonar and they have things we can only dream of! They're so beyond us. They're so advanced."

As though that was the most ridiculous thing in the world, this guy said to me, "Rush, come on. They don't have hands."

"That's precisely my point!" I said, "Do you think if a dolphin or a deer could find a shotgun and aim back at us, it would?"

"It shouldn't have to, Rush! That's the whole point; it's not fair that the deer doesn't have the shotgun, and we do. It's just not fair!"

"No. No, no. That's not the way to look at it. Do you know what the purpose of the deer is?"

Anyway, they got lost in these discussions. We're not permitted to be part of nature. All we do is plunder it, all we do is destroy it, but we are not part of it according to extreme leftists... Well, they're not extreme. You can find that anywhere you want to look on the left. On the Internet, on blogs, you'll find people who really do believe this. So with that as a setup, here is the next story.

It's from the Daily Mail Online, and it is about an engineer, based in Amsterdam, a woman by which time Nell Watson. She was speaking at a conference in Sweden of fellow engineers and other highly trained, brilliant human beings. She said that we need to be very careful as we invent and create robots because the day will come where robots could decide the greatest compassion to human beings as a race would be to wipe us out.

If we're not careful, artificial intelligence will end up being superior to human intelligence, and when that happens, when artificial intelligence -- i.e., made by us, computer chips made by us, man-made artificial intelligence in robots and computers. When the inevitable day comes that our machines are smarter than we are, they will conclude overnight that the best thing they could do for us would be to wipe us out, to eliminate the human race.

Ms. Watson... (interruption) You've seen this movie? How many times? (interruption) Yeah, I, Robot. There have been a bunch of them based on this premise. Now, this woman, Nell "Watson said computer chips could soon have the same level of brain power as a bumblebee," and when that happens, look out, because that means "allowing them to analyze social situations," and you know that if the bumblebees could, they would wipe us out.

They can't, but it doesn't matter. They would if they could, because we deserve it. Don't you see the point? We deserve to be wiped out, and the machines are gonna figure this out if we're not careful. We deserve to be wiped out because we are plundering and we are destroying. We are agents of destruction. Look, we're polluting the oceans. We got 10 years left or we're all gonna die!

We're destroying the climate. We're doing all these horrible things. We're destroying species. It's terrible, what we're doing! So if we make the mistake of creating artificial intelligence that become smarter than we are, those machines are gonna realize what reprobates we are and what damage we cause, and the only solution would be to wipe us out -- and they will do it, so that the machines will be able to have the whole planet to themselves.

Then it'll just be the machines and the animals and everything will then be pristine and perfect. Now, lest you think that this is obscure, her comments follow several tweets by the founder of Tesla, the electric car company. His name is Elon Musk. He tweeted earlier this month, "Artificial intelligence could be more dangerous than nuclear weapons." This is just the latest example. This is at an engineers conference.

You know, this is the kind of thing that 25 years ago I'd see a story like this and we would make a parody of it, and we would laugh at it, make fun of it -- never, ever realizing that a lot of people someday would actually believe it! So much of what we laughed at 25 years ago -- just extreme, ludicrous stuff -- now has become mainstream liberal thinking. This is another one about human beings.

This isn't new that we're the problem. This isn't new that we're the scourge of the planet. It's not new thinking, and also the solution -- wiping us out -- is not new. It's just the mechanism by which it's gonna happen now is gonna be computers. Machines, when they get smarter than we are (chuckling), are gonna figure it out real quick: To save themselves and the planet, humanity has to go.

RUSH: You know, I just got an e-mail during the break. I'll paraphrase it. I'm really glad I got it. There are days, more and more days, where I feel like I'm starting this program all over from scratch. I get the sense there are people listening for the first time, a lot of people for the first time, for whatever reason.

The question I just got was: "Mr. Limbaugh, I just started listening to you, and you make a lot of sense, but you lose me with this talk that machines are gonna wipe out the human race. Why even talk about that? That's so silly, nobody's gonna believe that." I love that e-mail because it gives me an opportunity to bring people up to speed. You all have been listening for 25 years and have all the context necessary to understand the things we talk about on this program. Somebody that's just tuning in, whoa, what the hell does this guy believe?

Here's the point, if the e-mail question is something that resonates with you. The point is, whether you want to believe it or not, there are a sizable number -- this woman that made this statement is a highly recognized and educated engineer at a worldwide engineering conference in Sweden. She's not some kook weirdo that tweets. She's got several education awards and citations in the field of engineering. She actually said it. You know, I don't make things up here and I don't exaggerate.

The way this manifests itself is that one day your kid might come home from school and say something to you that sounds cockamamie. "Mommy, Mommy, why are we destroying the planet? Why will someday the world be better off without humans?" And you'll say, "What the hell are you talking about?" And then the kid will tell you that the teacher was talking about it today. Now, this kind of stuff happens routinely. This is part of the political landscape of the country. This is who left wingers or liberals are. And it's not new, the fact that humanity is the scourge of the planet. And they are not an obscure, small, minor, oddball, kook population.

These are mainstream, highly celebrated engineers, like Paul Ehrlich, who wrote a book back in the seventies called The Population Bomb, which has been, by virtue of time, proven to be totally wrong. It was all about, by the time we got to the year 2000, we would have to start killing off large swaths of humanity because there would not be enough resources to feed, to house, to clothe, and to quench the thirst of as many billions of people. There were simply too many people, there weren't enough resources, and it was gonna get really bad, and it was going to be dystopian.

Now, this guy is still a professor at Stanford, and he is still a hero. He is still cited as an expert, and he is still lecturing. I don't know if he still lectures, but he still has influence with a bunch of young, impressionable minds. It's a romantic notion that human beings are destroying the planet. It's a romantic notion to want to stop that, it's a romantic thing. It gives your life meaning to say, "I can do something to save the world." And this is what the left gloms onto as a means of offering people meaning in their lives. But what they have to do, they have to first admit that by virtue of their own existence, they are helping to destroy the planet or the climate or whatever, the polar bears, but then there's absolution for this.

If they simply vote Democrat, believe in big government, pay higher taxes, that is how they give their lives meaning, that's how they make amends for all of the mistakes they've made, innocent though they may have been, in destroying the planet. This is not tiny. It's not way out of the mainstream. It may sound kooky, but there are people being educated to believe this all over this country, and they end up being teachers, and they end up trying to teach your kids this stuff.

That's why I mention it, is to try to just alert everybody. We'd be much better off if everybody understood who liberals are and had an automatic distrust of what they say, as the starting point, rather than an automatic belief. But the liberals have been pretty smart. They have couched every belief they have in compassion, fairness, equality, what have you, premises which are impossible to oppose. The environmental movement's classic.

Mr. Snerdley, the reason why I feel like I'm starting all over from scratch is because I explained all this stuff 25 years ago, but I get e-mails from people don't know what I'm talking about. So it is a major recycling going on out there, and it may be called for. But, for example, the environmentalist wacko movement, they set themselves up as being for what? Clean air, clean water. Who opposes any of that? So if you come out and oppose the environmentalists, they can easily say, "What, are you afraid? You oppose clean water? You oppose clean air?" They totally disguise themselves and mischaracterize themselves and their opponents.

But all leftists have one agenda, and that is basically summed up, the government must be big and bigger, must be growing. Individuals must have as little freedom as possible so they will be less destructive as possible. The elites must run the world. Average people are incompetent and incapable. Leftists, real committed, top tear leftists have an overall contempt for average people, while claiming to be the primary defenders of average people. They claim to be the ones looking out for average people, when in truth, they don't want you having power or control, or as little as they can see to it that you get.

It's an anti-liberty, anti-freedom, big government, high tax belief system. The people that create the problems then set themselves up as the only ones capable of fixing them, and it repeats and repeats so that we're now $17 trillion in debt. We have mess after mess after mess. We have people at war with each other consistently in this country. And it's all primarily because there are people who are simply unwilling to let people live their lives the way they want to. You must comport to the way leftists demand that you live. And that's how you are absolved from the sins other humans are committing out there.

But all leftists have one agenda, and that is basically summed up, the government must be big and bigger, must be growing.

Rush is wrong about animal preservationists. Government, BLM specifically, is rounding up wild horses and treating them in a most inhumane fashion. Those who want the horses left to live their lives free want government OUT of the matter.

I can't think of any situation where that might go wrong.

Except for....

...Um...

....Um.....

....Um....

This demonization of humans as a species makes totalitarianism more acceptable. But it has been mainstream for a long time.

Look at the books and later TV shows of “Life after people”, and then the rival show with the exact same concept. Couple that with environmentalist books about how great the world is after 90% or more die, or how the threat to the valley of eco-friendly people is the radical religious people (Gate to Women’s Country, A Gift Upon the Shore, and others).

But demonization of people using Mother Earth as the justification makes it independent of Christian admonishments to be good stewards, as well as allowing you to attack all faiths equally.

It would be easy to blame Lovelock’s Gaia Hypothesis for the modern environmentalists who shifted from conservation to de-development and human hatred, but it is more likely due to the communists who migrated to the environmentalist movement and melded with it to bash industrialization, freedom, religion and conservatives.

We’re fighting a secular/neo-pagan movement that sees people as the enemy, except the chosen people who seek to protect the Earth from the rest of us. And unlike Muslim terrorists who would let us live to convert, many of these environmentalists only see utopia when the rest of us die.

"I'd like to share a revelation I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we ... are the cure."

AI will think like us.
Many techies think that we need to invent a super-AI that is smarter than us, can merge with us and let us upload our brains into a virtual heaven - AKA, they don’t believe in a God but want to invent it.
The same groups think average people are a plague on the planet. The people assigning the value of a human life and the degree to which human rights to life and property and freedom should be respected will give them all be given low values by these programmers. And with the low value of a life or freedom the machine gives us, while the high negative value associated with the resources we use and waste we generate, it is easy to see how those seeking to invent these advanced AI will create something that says it is better if most people don’t exist.
Of course, they assume that since they will be uploaded to cyber-heaven or be valuable as creators/servants of the machine, they will be fine.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.