Dangerous Enviro-Wackos

Over the years we've seen more than a few enviro-wackos. Many are harmless (mostly just annoying). Some are earnest in their desires to “save” the Earth (which doesn't need saving, at least not from us). And there's a small group that are very dangerous, either due to their actions (Earth First, ELF, ALF, etc) or their ideology. It is latter of this last group which I find to be the most dangerous.

In particular this last group sees mankind as something to be tightly controlled, if not eliminated from the face of the earth. Their hatred of the human race is almost pathological. One such 'psychopath' is Bill McKibben, who 'advised' the White House in its decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline.

McKibben's hope?

This the alternate food reality McKibben wants for America: "Local, labor-intensive, low-input agriculture." And this is how he sells it: "You'll be standing guard over your vegetable path with your shotgun, warding off the marauding gang that's after your carrots." Yes, seriously: A man that has heavy sway in the Obama White House wants you to drop that grocery bag and go load up on bullets and carrot seeds.

According to McKibben's twisted math, the poorer we are, the better for the planet, because "one-seventieth the income means one-seventieth the damage to the planet." And he doesn't just want to shrink our incomes. He's also looking to shrink the size of human civilization overall. As he's put it, his environmental vision means "the human population would need to get gradually smaller."


No kids. No progress. No income. Working intensively in subsistence farming. Hiring militias to enforce anti-progress social norms.

It seems to me this has been tried by someone before and the outcome was horrific to see. To whom am I referring?

Pol Pot.

He and the Khmer Rouge tried to do just that in Cambodia as a means to ensure ideological purity. Everyone had to become a farmer. Anyone with 'dangerous' knowledge had to be re-educated, in this case “re-educated” being a euphemism for “killed”. Does the phrase Killing fields ring a bell with anyone?

Over 1.3 million Cambodians were executed for not adhering to the strict rules the Khmer Rouge imposed. Up to an additional 1.4 million died of starvation as subsistence farming wasn't able to raise enough food to feed everyone. The utopia of the type McKibben would like to see eliminated over a third of the population of Cambodia. Life was harsh, miserable, brutal, and short.

But of course I doubt McKibben would be one of those 'fortunate' enough to have to live that kind of lifestyle. After all someone would have to keep an eye on the rest of the serfs and that kind of responsibility requires special consideration.

So until McKibben and those of his ilk are willing to do more than talk the talk and actually start living the type of life they want the rest of us to live, we're going to ignore them...or kill them if they try to impose their beliefs upon us. Of course I would expect that once they actually had to live a subsistence life style they would quickly show their hypocrisy by abandoning their utopian ideals and returning to the modern conveniences of civilization.