Posted on 06/05/2004 10:51:43 AM PDT by Hillary'sMoralVoid
Environmentalists often use the phrase "Think Globally, Act Locally" as their strategy for addressing environmental issues around the world. Unfortunately, a couple of other phrases come to mind: "Out of sight, out of mind", "Not in my back yard" and "Think Anti-capitalism and Act Anti-capitalism".
If one has ever analyzed the oil extraction, refining and shipping operations in the Middle East, Russia, or Eastern Europe, they realize that there are few, if any, environmental standards that these countries are being held to.
Yet, in the United States, Alaska specifically, our "global-thinking" environmentalists would prohibit operations that would be much more environmentally-friendly than anything on the other side of the world.
The Alaska pipeline, a rallying cry for protest while it was being laid, now is greeted with an eerie silence by environmentalists. This is sheer hypocrisy, because by almost every measure, it has had an overall positive impact on the environment.
Any exploration in ANWR will certainly exceed the environmental standards that the Alaska pipeline was subject to, which, by the way, are light-years ahead of standards in the Middle East, Russia or Eastern Europe.
Any attempts to drill in our own back yard are greeted by the environmentalists cry for decreased reliance on fossil fuels. What many don't realize is that fossil fuels provide inexpensive hydrocarbon building blocks for modern plastics and composites, which decrease our reliance on metals, the mining of which often has far more severe environmental impact than drilling. Because of the increased use of plastics and composites, the strong demand for oil will continue into the forseeable future.
If drilling in the United States (Alaska as well as other on- and off-shore sites) has a net positive benefit for the global environment, why do "environmentalists" not embrace it?
There are few conclusions that can be made. The most obvious one is that there is an anti-capitalist, anti-American bias within the environmental movement. Ironic, isn't it, that the socialist Chavez regime in Venezuela isn't a target of the environmental movement? The second conclusion is that their agenda isn't really environmental at all, or they would be attacking the pollution problems in Russia and the Middle East with great passion, which they are not.
The environmental movement needs to be challenged on a global basis and exposed for what they really are. For example, what is their stand on pollution in the Caspian Sea as opposed to potential pollution in ANWR? (Hint: Caspian Sea pollution is a serious problem that gets little attention by our "green" buddies)
"Acting locally" can and should refer to bringing oil exploration and production back to our own country where we can control the environmental impact for a net global environmental benefit. It's time for the true environmentalists to start thinking from this perspective.
FMCDH(BITS)
ping
The slogan, so beloved of the Greenies, "Think globally, act locally" was originated by a French communist group, the Situationalist International during the 1960's. Is the association between environmentalists and communists purely coincidental? I think not.
Green is the color of sick people.
This form of environmental socialism/communism will only serve to destroy wealth and capital as all forms of socialism/communism do. But if everyone is poor, then the goals of these people have been reaches.
Bidding on NPR-A opened this week. 6 billion barrels estimate, same as ANWR, yet the enviros are silent.
NPR has oil? That must be very embarrassing for them.
Maybe they're trying working up a strategy to keep it off the market.
They live and think two to five decades in the past. While some Liberals accuse Conservatives of thought patterns centuries out of date, the enviros cannot respond to anything current. Rachel Carson is the closest they come to the present moment. They cannot keep up with events because it takes time for philosophical concrete to set up.
"Environmentalism isn't about the environment. It's a social movement that is geared towards equalizing the wealth of all people. By burdening the wealthy countries more than the poor countries, they hope equality can be achieved.
This form of environmental socialism/communism will only serve to destroy wealth and capital as all forms of socialism/communism do. But if everyone is poor, then the goals of these people have been reaches."
I've said it before...Environmentalists don't care about equality in the socialist form.They simply see that socialist policies help them accomplish their true goal.
Which is: Creating an environment in which human life is impossible.
Humans make life possible by changing their environments to fit themselves,not vice-versa.
The enviro-nuts believe that nature is an "intrinsic" value, which ignores the question,"Of value...to whom?"
"Value", is that which makes life possible, enriched, and fulfilling.
Exploiting resources is the way that humans live, enrich, and fulfill their lives.
This is what environmentalists want to put an end to.
Your Fulfillment.
Your Enrichment.
Your Life.
BTTT!!!!!!
It is truly criminal what radical "environmentalism" does to our children, for it poisons their minds with a toxic sludge, robbing them of any optimism for their future, and fostering a self-loathing. That may or may not be the goal, but it sure is the effect.
Bump!
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.