Tuesday, 21 April 2009

Exploit the Earth, or be square [update 3]

I hear it’s Earth Day some time this week.  Don’t worry.  Give it no mind (which is all its supporters are able to do) and CELEBRATE EXPLOIT THE EARTH DAY INSTEAD!!

Be there or be square.

Craig Biddle of the Objective Standard reckons that “because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology, on April 22 those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.”

    Exploiting the Earth—using the raw materials of nature for one’s life-serving purposes—is a basic requirement of human life. Either man takes the Earth’s raw materials—such as trees, petroleum, aluminum, and atoms—and transforms them into the requirements of his life, or he dies. . . According to environmentalism, however, man should not use nature for his needs; he should keep his hands off “the goods”; he should leave nature alone, come what may. Environmentalism is not concerned with human health and wellbeing—neither ours nor that of generations to come. If it were, it would advocate the one social system that ensures that the Earth and its elements are used in the most productive, life-serving manner possible: capitalism.
    Capitalism is the only social system that recognizes and protects each individual’s right to act in accordance with his basic means of living: the judgment of his mind. Environmentalism, of course, does not and cannot advocate capitalism, because if people are free to act on their judgment, they will strive to produce and prosper; they will transform the raw materials of nature into the requirements of human life; they will exploit the Earth and live. . .
    It comes down to this: Each of us has a choice to make. Will I recognize that man’s life is the standard of moral value—that the good is that which sustains and furthers human life—and thus that people have a moral right to use the Earth and its elements for their life-serving needs? Or will I accept that nature has “intrinsic” value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of human needs—and thus that people have no right to exist?
    There is no middle ground here. Either human life is the standard of moral value, or it is not. Either nature has intrinsic value, or it does not.
    On April 22, make clear where you stand. Don’t celebrate Earth Day; celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day—and let your friends, family, and associates know why.

Here’s what Capitalism Magazine has put together for Exploit the Earth Day – more than enough for a wild party:

Environmentalism's goal is not the advancement of human health, human happiness, and human life; rather, it is a subhuman world where "nature" is worshipped like the totem of some primitive religion.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5167
Because Earth Day is intended to further the cause of environmentalism--and because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology--on April 22, those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5165
There is an alternative to the environmentalist argument.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=4206
For decades environmentalists have cried that man should adopt an "alternative" form of energy. But in this freest country on earth, exactly how have they exercised their liberty to try and make their dream come true?
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=4901
Green energy policies would hobble the economy.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5439
Atmospheric scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said, "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming."
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5382
So many thing are happening now that, as I take time off to participate in the Tea Party in Newport News, Virginia on April 15, I have decided to devote just brief commentary on a selection of events.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5502
In spending its way to economic recovery, the government boldly casts principles aside.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5501
The heart of the problem: corporate greed in the form of grocery stores and restaurants operating on a for-profit basis.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5499
Words are not the only things that enable political rhetoric to magically transform reality. Numbers can be used just as creatively-- and many voters are even more gullible about statistics than they are about words, apparently because statistics seem more objective.
--> http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=5500


UPDATE 1:  Increasing numbers of Americans are seeing through the global warming scam. Details here.

UPDATE 2: Tim Blair comments on Americans increasingly seeing the light:

Degrees in global warmenology are now available from the University of the Sunshine Coast.

UPDATE. Warmening degrees may not be worth much in the US, where doubt continues to grow

Just one-out-of-three voters (34%) now believe global warming is caused by human activity, the lowest finding yet in Rasmussen Reports national surveying. However, a plurality (48%) of the Political Class believes humans are to blame. 

The political class is always the last to catch on.

UPDATE 3:  From the Mises Economics Blog, and just in time for Exploit the Earth Day, comes  "Economic Calculation in the Environmentalist Commonwealth," under review at the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. The abstract:
Do environmental initiatives like carbon accounting provide a viable alternative to monetary calculation based on profit and loss? Economic insights about calculation and imputation suggest that they do not provide a reliable, rational guide to action. Non-monetary calculation of the environmental effects of action runs into the same problems of in natura calculation and commonly-owned means of production. The information needed for rational economizing does not exist when we forsake the price mechanism. A legal regime based on strict private property rights solves environmental problems. Relaxed restrictions on property rights can generate environmental benefits and reduce our contribution to environmental degradation. Examples include the elimination of restrictions on housing markets and privatization of municipal recycling and garbage collection.
Bonus point -- in fact, a free full-colour digital copy of The Free Radical magazine -- for any reader who can name the hat tip in the title.


  1. Unfortunately, given the number of Americans who believe their imaginary friend created everything 6000 years ago, I very much doubt that their scepticism in most cases is based on the weight of evidence. It's probably more due to the slow realisation that the green nutters want to destroy civilisation as we know it, and they actually like their comfortable homes and lifestyle.

  2. "given the number of Americans who believe their imaginary friend created everything 6000 years ago"

    And what number would that be? Even among religious conservatives, I'd guess that number to be pretty low, based on extensive reading of conservative blogs over the past few years.

  3. Forty something percent believe in evolution these days according to most surveys, and it's getting worse.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.