The people who oppose drilling in Alaska are using the environment to support their socialist philosophy, so says
George Will. I have read this piece a couple times and the logic Will presents boggles my mind. Choice excerpts below the flip.
Huh?
For some people,
environmentalism is collectivism in drag. Such people use environmental causes and rhetoric not to change the political climate for the purpose of environmental improvement. Rather, for them, changing the society's politics is the end, and environmental policies are mere means to that end.
The unending argument in political philosophy concerns constantly adjusting society's balance between freedom and equality. The primary goal of collectivism -- of socialism in Europe and contemporary liberalism in America -- is to enlarge governmental supervision of individuals' lives. This is done in the name of equality.
So, concern for the environment is now equated with a deviant philosophy that threatens the very nature of America. Wow George, maybe we are projecting some personal paranoia about your conservative utopia onto a simple argument. These wild claims are particulary funny when you look at the present state of affairs, wherein the powerful oil companies have a direct line to the White House.
This argument sums up the classic conservative mindset:
Few opponents of energy development in what they call "pristine" ANWR have visited it. Those who have and who think it is "pristine" must have visited during the 56 days a year when it is without sunlight. They missed the roads, stores, houses, military installations, airstrip and school. They did not miss seeing the trees in area 1002. There are no trees.
This wingnut displays the classic selfishness that is destroying our society. If something has no personal value in the immediate sense, it doesn't have a worth which we should concern ourselves. We haven't visited it, so why should we care? What a spiritually bankrupt ideology, completely lacking any foresight or sense of a world outside of one's own skin. There are a myriad of national parks, marine ecosystems and other natural jewels that have restricted access to preserve their wild character. I don't need to physically tramp across these areas to have an appreciation for what they represent. These places are increasingly rare and irreplaceable, and have an importance which is well beyond my narrow world.
ANWR is just a sunless, treeless wasteland to these parasites. There is no value in leaving a resource in the ground, that doesn't make sense to a no compromise capitalist who only sees extraction and development as progress. Will reveals the lack of humanity and a sense of things that prevades the conservative movement.
It is this same philosophy that brings us the "Healthy Forests" initiatives, the capitalist lament at a potential resource "wasted". The fact that people like Will not only miss the point, but attach some "non-American" ideals to anyone who crys foul is a dangerous trend. I suggest people like Will look at the issue of environmentalism in totality. For every "victory" like ANWR, there are a thousand failures, where the corporate interest wins out over the environment. If anyone doubts the magnitude, a quick scan around the world on google earth shows the true scope of the horror. So, finally a line in the sand is drawn, this one time, and assholes like Will frame it too look like radical environmentalists run the world. I wish that were true George, but unfortunately it is narrow, me first dinosaurs like yourself that control the agenda. Don't these people have children or any sense of the future? Why is it always the environment that has to compromise? Maybe the bird flu is Gaia's revenge.
