Saturday, August 10, 2013

Sustainability: Sustain this

If there's one word that makes me cringe whenever I hear it that would be the word sustainability. It's usually followed by a good scolding or some half-truth on it's way to a bold-faced lie. It will be uttered in every "green" rant you'll ever hear, referenced over and over on the campaign trail and, of course, slathered all over print ads, radio and TV commercials like so much cheap perfume.

sustainability sus·tain·a·bil·i·ty [suh-stey-nuh-bil-i-tee]
noun
1.the ability to be sustained, supported, upheld, or confirmed.
2.Environmental Science. the quality of not being harmful to the environment or depleting natural resources, and thereby supporting long-term ecological balance: The committee is developing sustainability standards for products that use energy.


Now I'm pretty certain that point number 2 was added more recently. If I were to look at a dictionary from the 1960's or 1970's I doubt the point number 2 would be in there. Words take on new meanings all the time, but few have such deceit, such arrogance, such an aura of shame as the word sustainability does as used by the modern finger waggers.

Time and time again the finger waggers looking down their noses at the rest of us just trying to get on with our lives have been proven wrong. Dead wrong. I don't use the word "dead" lightly here...

Almost nothing brought to us by the modern liberal politically correct ruling elite is sustainable. Moreover, almost nothing they claim to be unsustainable actually is. Going back to 60's when the enviro movement got it's wings all their dire predictions have been wrong, and perversely almost all their remedies have cost the world billions of dollars and countless lives.

Starting with the ban on DDT to protect the sustainability of bald eagles the lies and distortions started:

(From various articles...)
As early as 1921, the journal Ecology reported that bald eagles were threatened with extinction – 22 years before DDT production even began. According to a report in the National Museum Bulletin, the bald eagle reportedly had vanished from New England by 1937 – 10 years before widespread use of the pesticide.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service attributed bald eagle population reductions to a “widespread loss of suitable habitat,” but noted that “illegal shooting continues to be the leading cause of direct mortality in both adult and immature bald eagles,” according to a 1978 report in the Endangered Species Tech Bulletin.

A 1984 National Wildlife Federation publication listed hunting, power line electrocution, collisions in flight and poisoning from eating ducks containing lead shot as the leading causes of eagle deaths.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists fed large doses of DDT to captive bald eagles for 112 days and concluded that “DDT residues encountered by eagles in the environment would not adversely affect eagles or their eggs...

On June 14, 1972 William Ruckelhaus, Administrator of the EPA, as a result of political pressure from environmental extremists, made a one man decision to ban the use of DDT in United States, a move that was illegal. He took this action ignoring 8,300 pages of testimony and the findings of the hearing examiner and most scientists and in the absence of any honest substantiating science.


Not to turn this into a exposé on DDT I use this to point out that on every single subject the enviro/sustainability Nazi's lie and ignore facts - and people die. Millions have died from malaria and other insect related diseases that could have been prevented by using DDT.

Paul Erlich's Population Bomb scenario couldn't have been farther off the mark. Oddly it has sustained a myth that the human population is out of control and has led to a pathos that is seeing millions of woman deny the notion of even entertaining the idea of motherhood. Born of this pathos in part is also the tragedy of the abortion culture.

Peak oil is another grand myth. It is constantly reported that new and fantastic oil reserves are being found, and new technology has opened up access to more resources than could have been imagined only a few years ago. Prices continue to rise not because of a supply problem, but because of a political problem - all driven by environmental lies. Technology advancements will eventually make the use of oil significantly decrease, but in the here and now the vast majority of the people suffer high prices while just a few get filthy rich. Don't think the filthy rich dislike it that way.

More to the point about sustainability and leftist politically correct elites is what they have done to great unwashed in North America and Europe where this evil was born. What is sustainable about the morons and idiots being passed through the monopoly of public education? What is sustainable about the vast welfare state being aggressively promoted by left-wing? What is sustainable about the cost of the higher education and the "university-industrial complex"? What is sustainable about massive immigration into job-starved economies? What is sustainable about government spending that eats more and more of a nation's GDP? What is sustainable about a regulatory and tax environment that favors giant corporations over Mom and Pop's little world on Main Street? What is sustainable about the crony-capitalism that promotes the denuding of the West's industrial might in favor of cheap labor in Asia?

It's actually unfair to lay this all at the feet of leftism, the modern right-wing offers just token opposition and might as well be reclassified leftist-lite.

The trendy lie these days is the myth of man-caused global warming - or climate change as they like to call it. Climate change is a fact. It has been changing, sometimes dramatically, since the beginning of time. The perverse aspect of this whole made up debate is that even if man is in some small way responsible for rising temperatures the prescribed remedy when boiled down to it's essence is massive human depopulation of the planet. This is the end goal of the sustainability crowd, and it is based on lies.  

There is so little truth, because the elites have made it all relative. There can be no truth if everything is relative. All that's left is lies. What is sustainable about lies? Nothing.




But I could be wrong.


Ugh





8 comments:

The Crow said...

One word that makes me cringe is 'community'. Those who use the term in every other sentence, are the very ones who, by tirelessly working to engineer their version of it, ensure there will never be one.

Ugh said...

Indeed - two sides to the same coin, I'm afraid. Well put.

The Crow said...

Do you ever read amerika.org ?
You might enjoy the offerings :)

Timothy Birdnow said...

Well said! Sustainability is a term designed to promote stasis in society,which is a way to force socialism on us because a pie must them be split equitably. No growth means nobody gets rich.

I had a recent article at Canada Free Press about this. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/57000

alfin2101 said...

I don't know how much more of this left wing sustainability that we can sustain!

Which way to Galt's Gulch?

The Crow said...

It's compliment time. Ready?

The Protohuman is one of the best writers I have ever seen. Communication skills par excellence. Easy to read, unambiguous and interesting.
While packing a serious punch.
The only possible criticism is the somewhat overdone iterations of: "I may be wrong"...

Good job, Sir :)

Ugh said...

Thank you Mr. Crow! My tag line is a gimmick, of course - just ask my wife, I am never wrong. Just trying add a little humility to my list of attributes. Too much?

The Crow said...

Well, that depends...
I first ran into the idea of stating 'I may be wrong', in the superb novel 'Illusions', by Richard Bach.
I so liked the idea, once I had got over the shock, that I began to use it myself.
Meanwhile, I noticed the infinite amount of false humility floating around, on the internet, and decided it looked a bit too much like that. And cut my usage way, way down.

If it is true, and you may be wrong, fair enough.
If you know you are right, and often you are, then why bother with it? In such cases, it can only serve to undermine your own message.