Posted on 10/18/2010 7:59:03 AM PDT by Olympiad Fisherman
Prince Charles recently visited a Mumbai shantytown and praised its “sustainability” in which residents recycle their waste and build their own homes out of whatever materials come to hand. There is of course a word for this form of “sustainability”, it’s called grinding poverty.
Charles is of course not the first rich European to romanticize poverty as some sort of higher spiritual principle ...
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
In her treatise on the New Left, written in 1970, Ayn Rand noted this phenomenon. The old left promised a better standard of living, and failing to provide it, glorified the “struggle,” While the New Left glorified a lower standard of living.
“He must be a king”.
“How do you know that?”
“Well, he hasn’t got shit all over him.”
The left is losing votes from those alive, needs to get more from those not so much alive.
Can he (Prince Charles) not be locked up in one of his horse stables, and LIVE GREEN for a whole year?
The elite of the Green Left are well aware of this fact. Some argue that this half billion or so historic level of humans is all that is sustainable. Others are willing to concede advances in technology might make the current sustainable level 4-6 times the historic level.
But they all agree they should be the ones in charge of deciding which humans should be allowed to remain as part of the sustainable level and which should go. That is how arrogant these b*st*rds are!
Almost all of them romanticize primitive lifestyles because they consume fewer resources. They are quick to point out that Americans use much more than "our share" of "scarce" resources such as lumber, oil, etc. OTOH, they ignore that Americans produce a far more overwhelming share of other resources such as corn (65%), steel (30%) and plastics (40%) because, in their demented mind, these are not natural resources and, somehow, the process of turning the most primitive parts of nature into something which is technologically advanced is not part of their sustainability equation.
The book “Outliers” noted that many cultures developed prolonged periods of idleness not out of sustainable leisure (a la the Green fantasy), but to minimize energy burn during periods of near-starvation. Such peoples would have been thrilled to enlarge their carbon footprint.
bump
***There is of course a word for this form of “sustainability”, it’s called grinding poverty. ***
I remember hearing about it from my parents who lived on the high plains during theDust Bowl days.
And I saw it first hand in the Ozarks during the 1950s.
NEVER AGAIN!
**And I saw it first hand in the Ozarks during the 1950s.***
All you had to do was go West 100 miles and get a good job! But most in the Ozarks didn’t want to leave their home so they stayed poor.
They never did.
Their entire existence is based on lies, subsidies and hidden costs.
To the tune of hundreds of billions$. Since at least the early 70s, that I am personally aware of. Every large private or publicly funded "green" alternative power installation conveniently neglects to keep track of complete construction and maintenance costs.. EVERY SINGLE ONE.
Why do you suppose... ?
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.