Author Topic: The Forest For The Trees  (Read 1775 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
The Forest For The Trees
« on: June 01, 2007, 11:04:56 PM »
If Only Greens Saw The Forest For The Trees

By ROY INNIS | Posted Thursday, May 31, 2007 4:30 PM PT

"People here have no jobs," Mark Fenn admitted, after taking documentary producers on a tour of his $35,000 catamaran and the site of his new coastal home. "But if you could count how many times they smile in a day, if you could measure stress" and compare that with "well-off people" in London or New York, "then tell me, who is rich and who is poor?"

Fenn is coordinator of the World Wildlife Fund's campaign against a proposed mining project near Fort Dauphin, Madagascar. The locals strongly support the project and want the jobs, development, improved living standards and environmental quality the state-of-the-art operation will bring.

People there live in abject poverty, along dirt roads, in dirt-floor shacks, and are hardly able to afford food on their $1,000-a-year average incomes. There is little power, no indoor plumbing. The local rain forest has been destroyed for firewood and slash-and-burn farming. People barely eke out a living.

But Fenn claims the mine will change the "quaint" village and harm the environment. He says he feels "like a resident," his children "were born and raised" there, and the locals "don't consider education to be important" and would just spend their money on parties, jeans and stereos.

Actually, Fenn lives 300 miles away and sends his children to school in South Africa. And the locals hardly conform to his insulting stereotypes. "If I had money, I would open a grocery store," said one. "Send my children to school," start a business, become a midwife, build a new house, said others.

You have to see the film, "Mine Your Own Business," to fully grasp the callous disdain these radicals have for the world's poor. Don Imus' intemperate remarks were insensitive. But Fenn's demeaning, even racist, statements perpetuate misery.

These enemies of the poor say they are "stakeholders" wishing to "preserve" indigenous people and villages. They never consider what's wanted by the real stakeholders — those who live in these communities and must endure the consequences of harmful campaigns waged all over the world.

The WWF, Greenpeace, Oxfam, Sierra Club, Rainforest Action Network and other multinational activist groups battle mines in Romania, Peru, Chile, Ghana and Indonesia; electricity projects in Uganda, India and Nepal; biotechnology that could improve farm incomes and reduce malnutrition in Kenya, India, Brazil and the Philippines; and DDT that could slash malaria rates in Africa, where the disease kills 3,000 children a day.

They harp on technology's speculative hazards and ignore real, life-or-death dangers that modern mining, development and technology would reduce or prevent. They never mention the jobs, clinics, schools, roads, improved housing and small business opportunities — or the electricity, refrigeration, safe water, better nutrition, reduced disease and fewer dead children.

They pervert "sustainable development" to mean no development, and ignore how mines will lay the foundation that will sustain prosperity and better living standards for generations.

Agitators use global warming and "corporate social responsibility" to force companies to acquiesce to their agendas — and ignore human rights to energy and technology, and people's desperate cries for a chance to take their rightful places among the Earth's healthy and prosperous people.

They extol the virtues of microcredit, to support minimal family enterprises, and demand debt forgiveness and more foreign aid for corrupt dictators — but oppose economic development that would eliminate the need for international welfare. They blame Newmont Mining for accidents that killed five people over a two-year period in Ghana, but refuse to admit that their pressure campaigns cause millions of deaths every year.

One could justifiably call it eco-manslaughter — or a racist experiment on powerless, impoverished Third World families.

Yes, there are environmental impacts from mines, dams and other development. There are health and other risks. But the Industrial Revolution also brought those changes. Are we worse off for it? Do we want to return to the jobs, lifestyles and living standards of pre-industrial, pre-electric America, when 95% of Americans were farmers, cholera and malaria were ever-present, and the average life expectancy was 45?

Would any of the greens, politicians and celebrities who clamor to keep the world's poor "indigenous" (and thus impoverished, energy-deprived and diseased) care to live that lifestyle for even one month? Would they exchange their 10,000-square-foot mansions for a hovel, give up electricity and stop globe-trotting in private jets?

Why hasn't the United Nations criticized the institutional racism being perpetrated in the name of "saving the planet"? Where are U.S. civil rights groups, media, churches and these poor countries' leaders? This intolerable situation cannot continue. People of conscience must no longer remain silent.

Innis is national chairman of the Congress of Racial Equality, a civil rights group that promotes economic development rights for the poor worldwide.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=265498936316630&type=right

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2007, 12:07:35 AM »
"Why hasn't the United Nations criticized the institutional racism being perpetrated in the name of "saving the planet"? Where are U.S. civil rights groups, media, churches and these poor countries' leaders? "

Because it is not politically correct, that is why.
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

fatman

  • Guest
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2007, 02:06:37 AM »
The article doesn't state what kind of mining will be going on, nor does it give any idea of what the laws are there regarding clean-up of contaminated sites.  Depending upon the kind of mining going on, it can be either environmentally insignificant or a major disaster.  There are a lot of Superfund sites here in the US that have been dumped on the taxpayers by mining companies that took a quick buck then got out.  Obviously, not all mining companies do this but a lot of them do.  If this were to be a gold mine, with an associated cyanide extraction process (again, the article says nothing of the metal mined or the processes involved) the environmental risks are huge, especially if the mining operator was unscrupulous and left the problem to the govt of Madagascar, which I have a feeling is not one of the world' richest nations.

Resource extraction can be a huge boon to local populations,especially if conducted in a responsible manner.  The author Jared Diamond related a story in one of his books about two different oil companies, one of which was awful and the other (Chevron, if I remember right) which was responsible and maintained a pristine ecological habitat.  It is a matter of how important (and economic) the company views the idea of conservation.  However, it should be noted too that the boon can be short-lived, or turn to disaster in the face of an environmental catastrophe.  It is the responsibility of the Madagascaran government to make that determination.

As the article is devoid of specifics, and the rest of it consumed in a rant against environmentalists (albeit, some of it justified) I cannot state whether I feel this mine operation should continue.

It should be noted that I am all for responsible resource extraction (who isn't?), whether it be logging, fishing, mining, whatever.  The problem I have is twofold.  The first is the attitude of some individuals who want to develop their projects and leave the taxpayers stuck with the clean-up bill, thanks to the antiquated mining laws here in the US (see Anaconda copper mine in MT), or to fish out the oceans (or log the trees) until nothing is left.  This happens far more than it should, and people should have some wariness of extraction processes, especially in their backyards.  The other problem  I have is with the "green groups" popping up with a lawsuit every time a project is even proposed.  Some resource development is necessary, and always will be.  The lawsuit happiness of eco-nazi's and their lawyers are part of what is driving the ecological rape of the third world, the other parts being that it is easier to make a profit (labor costs and all that), and the underexploitation of third world resources compared to first world.  It seems to me that the responsible thing to do would be to analyze what projects could and should occur here in the US without the threat of lawsuits, and weed out the unscrupulous companies from doing business here.

One last thing, unrelated to this post but on the environmental topic: My previous posts have established that I am not a scientist (and certainly not a chemist, right XO and Ami?) but it defies common sense (mine at least, which is admittedly different than a lot of other people's) that putting X amounts of CO2 and other pollutants/gasses into the atmosphere isn't going to have at least some effect on the global climate.  I don't pretend to know how much global warming man causes or contributes to, but to me it seems that we must have at least some effect.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2007, 07:33:35 AM »
that putting X amounts of CO2 and other pollutants/gasses into the atmosphere isn't going to have at least some effect on the global climate.  I don't pretend to know how much global warming man causes or contributes to, but to me it seems that we must have at least some effect.

Nobody ever said that it had no effect. However, one volcanic eruption can dwarf the CO2 production of the entire US. And it's becoming more apparent that global warming is more dependant on solar cycles than on greenhouse gases, since we're seeing the effects of global warming on planets where we don't live.

What most global change scientists say is that man has an effect, but the amount of that effect is currently unknown and not likely to be more that a minor portion of the change.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

gipper

  • Guest
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2007, 09:47:40 AM »
Were I a policy-maker, I would inveigh for initiatives restricting -- compatibly with the employment needs of a given community, in a conception requiring trade-offs, shared burdens, and ever-enlightened technology -- greenhouse gases NOW, on the theory that IF the avant garde predictions of a significant human cause of global warming are true, it may be too late to act at a time "when all the date is in." This cautionary approach, if proven feckless or futile, is, of course, reversible; warming, as I understand it, is not.

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2007, 10:44:29 AM »
gipper, I agree with you except this has to be weighed against the possibility of jobs. It all has to be shaken, not stirred and see what develops out of the process. A Utopian paradise may look beautiful but if no one has any jobs, then perhaps it is not so Utopian.
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2007, 03:12:00 AM »
-- compatibly with the employment needs of a given community, in a conception requiring trade-offs, shared burdens, and ever-enlightened technology --




That does seem to be the missing element in the Koyto accord.

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2007, 10:52:42 AM »
So, how valid is the Kyoto Accord if the two booming world economies, China and India, are not signatories? Are they likley to be?

Would signing this Accord make U.S. products more non-competitive on an international scale?
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2007, 11:40:57 AM »
Quote
Would signing this Accord make U.S. products more non-competitive on an international scale?

Is there correlative data between the ascendancy of the EPA and the decline of the US manufacturing base?

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2007, 05:02:23 PM »
Interesting question, BT> I honestly do not know.

However, if you must add 5 cents to a can of corn in order for your factories to meet extensive EPA regulations, then does this not make you more non-competitive than corn from countries where they do not need to add this additional 5 cents becauseTHEIR version of the EPA is either non-existent or weaker in compulsatory power?
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2007, 05:11:11 PM »
One would think so, considering also that they have cheaper labor on their side. We on the other hand have more efficient automation.

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2007, 06:44:46 PM »
This argment used to be true but now just about everyone purchases the automation and this has changed the dynamics, I am afraid.
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2007, 05:25:53 PM »
This argment used to be true but now just about everyone purchases the automation and this has changed the dynamics, I am afraid.


Who makes , programs and sells this automation?

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Forest For The Trees
« Reply #13 on: June 04, 2007, 07:44:07 PM »
This used ot be the sole province of U.S. firms but now forms from India to many in Western Europe also sell the same assembly-line equipment. In the several decades following WWII, U.S. industry had a monopoly on this, but not now.
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D