War on Man - Author's Introduction

War on Man - Author's Introduction Humans are the enemy! Canadian science broadcaster David Suzuki told a group of laughing students, “One of the things I’ve come up with recently...is that we’re all basically fruit flies.” But that was just the beginning, after which Suzuki began to liken us to “worms” that “are born like eggs” and then “eventually hatch and start crawling around” eating and “popping all over.”1 The denigration of humans by analogy with worms was irritant in those days (Suzuki seemed to be represented in the 1970s as a long-haired, drop-down, John Lennon round-eye), but few took these statements seriously. The purpose of these statements was to shock, or attract attention, rather than to incite a real hatred of humans. Unfortunately, the core values of the first environmental protection movements have all but disappeared, as has happened with legged trousers. In recent years, just as termites gnaw out the foundations of buildings (to borrow a Suzuki-like analogy), anti-humanism has descended into the thinking of environmentalists. Suzuki’s anti-human views have certainly not changed, and he is now world-renowned and active in the fight against global warming. When asked by a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation interviewer in 2009 how much he has changed his “completely unoptimistic” perception of humanity since he called humans worms, Suzuki dodged the question and deviated from the answer, stating that racism had been reduced, but lamenting that “humans are human beings...I just wish they were human!” Popular culture, of course, has embraced Suzuki’s anti-human thinking. The 2008 remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still, starring Keanu Reeves, presents the cool actor Michael Rennie, who came up with a space shuttle to save herself for a mission. But fearing our para-war tendencies, they hired him to warn us that we must be peaceful, otherwise, if we threaten to spread violence in space, we would face certain destruction from the killer robot (Gort). The film came at a time when the Cold War was heating up. Korea was already rushing into war. Both the Soviet Union and the US were developing more destructive nuclear weapons. The film reflected the compelling view that humanity not only deserves protection, but can also save itself, if we follow the best of our nature as human beings. It was the 1950s. But the message of the new film, it was not only darker, but it was shouting slogans of hatred against the human race. The alien community in this version did not care much about preserving the human species, because they believed that we were useless and unworthy of the effort they were making towards us.[iii] On the contrary, we have changed from a good friend of mankind, to a potentially formidable enemy. Klato justifies the quest for human extinction in stark terms, with the obvious result that the Earth is a living entity in its own right. This planet is dying, humans are killing it. Helen Benson: So you came here to help us? Klatto: No, I didn't. Helen Benson: You said you came to save us! I said, I came to save the earth. Clato’s flying saucer was replaced by a blue sphere resembling a small planet with clouds enveloping it. Earth-like spheres soon follow, and it is later revealed that they act as Noah’s Ark, but alien, in collecting all species from Earth, so that they can be brought back to grow again without interference or harassment, after the complete annihilation of humans. As in the original script, Clato is quickly shot, arrested, interrogated, and then manages to escape. He becomes friends with a boy and his mother[4], without the boy's (initially) knowledge that their new friend is that alien fugitive. They and a Nobel Prize-winning scientist in biological altruism (played by one of the protagonists of the comedy series Monty Python) turn out to be (John Clee's) survivalist! At the last possible moment, Clato cancels our extinction mission, but warns that our salvation will cost a great deal. As his space field leaves Earth’s atmosphere, a pulse has been emitted that has disrupted all of the technology on Earth. Unfortunately, Earth Sustained Day is not the only Hollywood blockbuster to spread that poisonous idea; that humans deserve to be wiped off the face of the earth because of what is supposed to be unreasonable damage to the biosphere. The Happening (2008), starring Mark Wahlberg and written and directed by prominent filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan, presents The End of the World’s Repression Revolution. The film begins with a scene of people on the East Coast suddenly committing mass suicide, and we see horrific scenes in which civilization is rapidly collapsing. Eventually, we discover that plants have launched a violent rebellion by releasing “suicide pheromones,” whenever humans gather in large groups and are exposed to those pheromones and are forced to kill themselves instantly by any means possible: lying in front of a lawnmower, hitting the car with walls, jumping out of the building, anything. “As mass suicides spread across the Northeast, the small circle of Wolberg’s refugees are steadily pushed into narrower and narrower corners. The small group takes to a typical house to develop the housing sector. When they realize that the plants are releasing pheromones whenever they find a certain number of people,” says Shiamalan. Eventually the attacks end. But lest anyone think it was just a coincidence, an environmental expert tells us on TV that what happened was a warning sent from the plants to change our lifestyles, or else! Another scene emerges in Paris, where people start killing themselves again in the Champs-Elysees. It is relatively comforting that none of these anti-human films have achieved significant revenue success.[viii] But the fact remains that Hollywood’s ever-eager studio system believes that there is an entertainment market for anti-human ideas that must exploit and expend hundreds of millions of dollars, and countless hours of work for the industry’s most accomplished talent, to spread the darkest environmentalism in the world. The strategy of advocating hatred of the human race was once surprising, but now as we shall see later we find this idea quite predictable from the environment. These anti-human tendencies and the use of technology were not limited to fiction. Nor were they limited to psychopaths such as the famous Ted Kaczynski or the university bomber and aircraft. Consider this seemingly good call: Earth Hour, which is launched every year around the world to get people to turn off their lights and appliances for 60 minutes. I’ve always thought of calling Earth Hour the same way I would of those widespread campaigns that have a distinctive ribbon attached to their chest; they give people a sense of self-satisfaction to care, without forcing them to make personal sacrifices. But then I read the column of journalist Ross McKitrick in Vancouver Sun and realized that the message behind Earth Hour, if not its obvious intent, was so devastating: By denying the greatest engine of our liberation, it has become a dedicated watch to serve anti-human thought. It encourages that gesture of sincerity in shutting down trivial electrical appliances – to maximize that vaguely abstract idea of the earth – while retaining all hypocrisy on the real benefits of having continuous and reliable electricity. Those who see the advantage in getting rid of electricity should turn off the refrigerator, oven, microwave, computer, water heater, lights, television and all other household appliances for a month, for example, not for an hour! Some might say, Weasley! Earth Hour is just spreading the idea that we need to rationalize energy consumption. Maybe... but I think McKittrick has a lot to tell us. Given the broader scope of ecology, it has become increasingly nihilistic, anti-renewable, and anti-human, to the point that the concept of conservation of nature’s resources has become obsolete because it has the potential to exploit resources to create wealth and prosperity. As we will discuss in the following pages, the anti-human aspect of the current environmental movement has many aspects: - The Deep Ecology Movement, which will destroy less than a billion people; - Inequitable and anti-growth trends in people affected by global warming; - The ridiculous concept of granting enforceable legal rights to nature; - The accompanying international campaign to criminalize the exploitation of resources and large-scale land development projects, because they are “green”. Now, once again pondering Earth Hour’s core message, you’ll find that its message isn’t hidden: technology is Earth’s enemy and must be curbed to “save the Earth,” just as Klato stopped the technology to keep Earth in the film. One wonders how many Earth Hour advocates have seriously considered the misery that humans face in places without power grids, where life is precarious, and often overwhelmed by extreme hunger and disease. In fact, for those suffering humans, we need more electricity, not less. This book will review the vast extent to which radical environmentalism has corrupted scientific rationality, which may have been premeditated. Indeed, it is very clear to me that that ideology seeks to replace the neutral scientific method of acquiring and applying facts and information with an emotional zeal reminiscent of quasi-dogmatic movements that seek to impose their intellectual puritanism on politics and the law. People do notice this corruption, which has weakened public trust in the scientific sector. For example, in 2011, Scientific American published a disturbing article that seeks to explain why “people say they trust scientists in general, but disagree with them on certain issues.”10 And let me help: The public is smart enough to distinguish between what are sometimes called practitioners of science and proponents of political science. The latter often seeks to combine our overwhelming support for science with approval of their political and ideological agendas. Then there is the attempt to corrupt the scientific method, by some self-proclaimed proponents of science, by justifying the misleading philosophy known as "Scientism". Scientificism asserts that science is not only able to tell us what things look like and how things work, but also is able to tell us right and wrong. Often in the environmental field, scientists have gone from revealing what is objective, to propagandizing what is subjective. We'll also examine how the Green Movement is now brown, what do I mean by that? When red is mixed with green,[xii] we have brown. By allowing itself to become openly anti-capitalist and anti-free market – in its perceptions and messages – the green movement has become a brown movement, which, along with ideological fervor, explains the growing tendency of environmentalists to embrace authoritarian solutions. Let me mention one example: the famous environmentalist David Shearman in 2008 wrote a hysterical article urging the adoption of authoritarianism[xiv] globally to enforce the implementation of the "scientific consensus" on the issue of global warming and other global environmental emergencies. And his wonderful example of progressive environmental management is because it is the People's Republic of China; of course it is the country that enforces forced abortion, Tiananmen Square[xv] and so on sale. "Yes, liberal democracy is attractive and addictive, and in extreme cases it is extreme, like the United States, where unrestricted personal freedom is overwhelmed by many common needs among citizens. This subject is sacred and no one can approach it, and those who engage in criticism are always stigmatized as Marxist, socialist, fundamentalist, or much worse. China’s decision on shopping bags is tyrannical and counterproductive in most Western democracies. We will have to see how authoritarian decisions based on scientific consensus can be implemented to contain greenhouse-gas emissions...If we do not act urgently, we may find ourselves choosing absolute freedom as an alternative to life.”11 Ah, as in the old maneuver "Let's rule the world, or we'll all die". Even our old friend David Suzuki, who believes that people are worms, recently joined the Green Power Band, where he argued that politicians should be jailed for violating the scientific consensus on global warming. “What I would ask you is to make a lot of effort to see if there is a legal way to put our so-called leaders in jail,” Suzuki told the McGill University audience. It doesn’t matter that Marxist governments have always been the worst environmental destroyers in history. It doesn’t matter that democratic societies cleaned up the polluted streets, because that was what people wanted. Freedom is not a luxury, and human prosperity requires freedom and prosperity where it can grow. The second is good when it depends on the use of land and the development of resources. These activities are now under prominent threat; because of the development that can be attributed to the activity of the deep ecology movement in the 1970s. Here we begin. What’s worse is that Clato, in his conversation with the US Secretary of Defense, denies that Earth is our planet! [4] His mother was Klato's interlocutor in the previous dialogue, Helen Benson, an astrophysicist. [vi] When Klato heard a passage of Bach's music during his interview that he described as beautiful, the professor replied that we were not completely different from each other, and began a dialogue that would change Klato's decision. [vii] The environmentalist in this scene says in the text: “We have become a threat to this planet, I don’t think anyone will argue about this,” which is the same idea as in the previous film. In 2008, The Dark Knight achieved first place with a total revenue of about $1 billion, and the fourth part of the series (Indiana Jones) second place with revenue of 786 million; while the film (The Day the Earth Stood Still) comes in 25th place with revenues of $ 233 million, and the film (The Happening) in 40th place with revenues of $ 163 million. [x] There is no doubt that the story of Avatar is not generally considered a defeat of environmental ideas, the main conflict in the story is a struggle against greedy colonizers, but there are phrases – apart from any analyses or reviews of the film – that can only be understood within the context of ecology, perhaps the most important of which is Sully’s talk about humans with Ewa (the indigenous goddess) before the events of the end: “Look at the world that is not there.” Some human beings, but, in the words of his hero, he is indifferent to human life as a whole! [xi] He wants to point out the multiplicity of interpretations of the same thing, as you find within the same religion more than one interpretation of the same sacred text, the same thing now exists in the field of scientific studies. Red usually refers to a communist orientation in politics and economics. Authoritarianism is a government characterized by a high degree of state power, and the predominant absence of procedures for popular approval or protection of the rights of individuals. The Tiananmen Square demonstrations were a series of protests by Chinese university students demanding democracy and reform, and were suppressed by opening fire on protesters by the military. (1) “Flashback 1972—David Suzuki: Humans are just ‘maggots’ that ‘defecate all over the environment,’” Hauntingthelibrary, May 12, 2012, http://hauntingthelibrary.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/flashback-1972-david-suzuki-humans-are-maggots-that-defecate-all-over-the-environment/. (2) David Suzuki, Interview by Jian Ghomeshi, Q with Jian Ghomeshi, CBC Radio, November 25, 2009, http://www.cbc.ca/radio_template_2012/blog/2009/11/25/what-do-you-think-about-what-david-suzuki-and-al-gore-have-to-say-1/. (3) “Trailer—The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951),” http://youtu.be/51JoEE_znyI. (4) See the description at “The Happening” (2008), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/. You can view the trailer at http://youtu.be/TIQ21m1Ks08. (5) “Signs” (2002), http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0286106/. (6) “AVATAR: Get Rid of Human Beings Now!” Movie Guide, http://www.movieguide.org/reviews/avatar.html. (7) “Ted Kaczynski,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski. (8) Article is still available on McKitrick’s website under the title of “Earth Hour: A Dissent,” http://www.rossmckitrick.com/uploads/4/8/0/8/4808045/earthhour.pdf. (9) Viv Forbes, “Earth Hour or Blackout Night?” Carbon Sense Coalition, press release, March 27, 2010, Scoop, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO1003/S00544.htm. (10) Daniel T. Willingham, “Trust Me, I’m a Scientist,” Scientific American, May 5, 2011, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trust-me-im-a-scientist/. (11) David Shearman, “Climate change, is democracy enough?” On Line Opinion, January 17, 2008, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6878. (12) Craig Offman, “Jail politicians who ignore climate science: Suzuki,” National Post, February 7, 2008, http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=290513. Clips attached to the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51JoEE_znyI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIQ21m1Ks08 - Wesley Smith. — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2018-08-20 (archived at the Internet Archive) https://braheen.com/publications/intros/الحرب-على-الإنسان-مقدمة-المؤلف