Well there you go! I read that blog action day – whatever that is – is due for the 15th Oct. Not only is it blog action day, but it’s all been arranged that we rap about the environment.
Every blogger will post about the environment in their own way and relating to their own topic. Our aim is to get everyone talking towards a better future.
Hey dudes, we’re so cool we must be in favour of the environment.
Well I guess I’m in favour of the environment, but I’m not to keen on a lot of environmentalism.
There are some really serious environmental challenges we face and I’m not that optimistic of our being able to respond properly. That’s global warming I’m talking about there. How exactly are we going to get India and China into the tent when we’ve spent more than a decade saying that of course they’re poor so it would be impolite to ask or even to bribe them to do something.
Whether all the hype and nonsense about so many other environmental issues (kerbside recycling and reducing waste to landfill being my favourite amongst many peeves) helps or hinders is anyone’s guess. But it sure is irritating.
Then again, it’s still important to avoid the fate of Peter Walsh who was our finest finance minister now reduced to the ratbaggery of the Lavoisier Group because (I’m guessing) his irritations got the better of him.
I find a good way to not get “caught up” as Peter Walsh may have, is to be maintain a disinterested and open mind – which is good advice for all areas not just environmentalism.
Yep, you’ve gotta try and seperate issues from personalities, because personalities are often really a pain in he backside. I reckon that self-righteous, sanctimonious and dogmatic people, stupid as they are not to recognise the complexity and uncertainty of things, are absolutely necessary to getting things done. We need the sh*t-stirrers. As the GBS quote goes:
But gee its hard to remember that when faced by some of these people.
On environmentalism, I agree we spend far too much time and effort on fifth-order issues (eg certain whale species, landfill) of dubious merit at the expense of the big picture. Usually those fifth order issues are so prominent because they either appeal to sentimentality rather than reason (the whales) or they are a great tool for those who delight in telling other peoples what to do (landfill).
… as distinct from …? Is this the dismallist fallacy “no environment without economy”?
ie, you’ve found a bottomless pit somewhere that magically returns the raw materials?
Why are economists fed?
Save the whales by all means, but also save the creatures at the bottom of the food chain (e.g. phytoplankton).
Re the conservation of matter, the dismallists would try to put a ‘price’ on the process instead of a value.
Like 27 brands of toothpaste there are far too many highly paid ‘positionistas’ overloading society (many of whom contribute to blogs)but the worst of all, apart from Drug Warriors, are the Dismal Sciencers.
I think the old contention ‘what’s wrong with a busload of economists going over a cliff? A – Too many vacant seats.” doesn’t grasp the problem.
Why weren’t they made to walk/crawl to the cliff edge dragging their useless theories behind them?