Friday, 23 October 2009

Feel guilty, or the dog gets it.

dog_gets_it Brenda & Robert Vale are like Tom & Barbara Good – your average middle-class, macrame-wearing refugees from Glastonbury – except Tom & Barbara were funny, and they would never ask you to shoot your dog. 

The Vales are two hand-wringing, hairshirt-wearing hippies from Surbiton the UK who made a career out of building what they called Autonomous Houses and “sustainable buildings” around England, many of them government funded, before heading to New Zealand where the climate for people living in houses without decent power was somewhat more generous – arriving at the very time when “sustainability” was just starting to become a buzzword here. 

Since arriving, they’ve built a semi-autonomous house on Waiheke, they’ve indoctrinated several hundred Auckland architecture students in their version of “sustainability” (self-renunciation all round and a double helping of sackcloth and ashes, please), and they’ve dreamed up a bureaucratic scheme for Australia that “measures the ongoing environmental impact of existing buildings.”  Lucky hippies. Lucky students. Lucky building owners.  These are people who dream stupid dreams and know how to get their “pet projects,” if you will, into law.

And now they’re branching out.  They’re taking time out from tripping over their wind chimes. They want you to eat your dog.

Specifically, in their new book Time to Eat The Dog, they (i.e., Robert and Brenda) say “pet owners should swap cats and dogs for creatures they can eat, such as chickens or rabbits.”  And why should we (ie., you and I) do this?  Because, they say, “the eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice that of a 4.6-litre Land Cruiser driven 10,000 kilometres a year.”

Yes, Virginia, grown adults (or at least, the Vales) sit around all day and do calculations like that, and dream up arguments like this.

The I Love Carbon Dioxide blog says, “It's bad enough that some people buy into the myth that their own ‘footprint’ is somehow a bad thing, but this just goes to show how far the absurd eco-alarmists can really go.” And so it does. This really takes sandal-wearing self-renunciation to a new height. 

Just a few weeks back a £6m British climate porn ad campaign was warning children “Turn out the lights or the dog gets it.”  Now the Vales are saying you should just shoot the dog anyway.  As one commenter says, “Why don’t these people worry about THEIR impact on the earth instead of telling everyone else how to live their lives.”

Or why don’t they just shoot themselves.  After all, don’t they breathe out CO2 too? And if self-renunciation is really their thing, and they’d like to do it properly . . .


  1. This is not the first issue that has been made about the ethics of pets in Western Societies.

    It has long been known that pets consume more food than it would take to feed all the worlds hungry. And all the other spending on pets would be enough to provide healthcare and infrastructure to the worlds poor.

    I am not for a second saying that people should shoot their pets.

    I am merely pointing out that that kind of a statement is not new but rather a rehash of an old line.

  2. Yep, Barry: Feeding Fluffy twice a day should make me ashamed of myself. Just imagine what World Vusion could do for "the chooldren"!! (Pausing here for a big sniff & nose blow).

    I heard this shit come over the radio yesterday, PC.

    It did nothing for my migraine.

  3. Robert Winefield23 Oct 2009, 16:08:00

    I have a solution to making fido carbon neutral. Stop feeding fido dog food and start feeding him with chopped up hippies and bureaucrats!

  4. Surely the only rational conclusion is for these people to eat themselves!
    How does dead bunny tossing fit in to all of this?

  5. Those dirty rotten fortunate people and their pet feeding. Make them starve their beloved animals so the world's poor can eat.


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.