Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Recent Letters Unpublished: Environmentalism 5

Vincent J. Curtis

3 Dec 2013

We have in Mr. D.C.  another hair-shirt environmentalist who thinks we should all endure his brand of asceticism.  Apparently, the joy and exuberance that large numbers of people feel and express and this time of the year he sees has harmful to his favorite cause, Gaia.

Mr. C. may have used the word ‘planet’ instead of Gaia, but he means Gaia.  Since a planet cannot be benefited, it cannot be harmed either.  A planet simply is what it is.  However, Gaia can be both harmed and benefited by the activities of man.  Gaia is the conception he has in mind when he uses the word planet in his article.

While there may be sound theological reasons for us to change our style of gift-giving, what Mr. C. advances is the unsound one of Malthus.  In the late 18th century it was argued that with the human population growing geometrically and the food supply arithmetically, the population would soon outstrip the food supply.  A similar argument has been advanced to explain why we would run out of oil and other supplies essential to a high civilization.  However, Malthusian predictions have never come to pass because the wealth created by growth has enabled man to use his brain and his skills to escape the convergence of population and resource.  Some people never seem to get that the Malthusian argument has been a consistent loser.

We are supposed to try “prosperity without growth” in place of prosperity through growth, according to our modern-day Malthus.  If the environmentalist ideal of a shrinking human population were to occur, as it is occurring in Europe and Japan, prosperity without growth may be feasible for a while.  But in Canada, whose population is growing, rising prosperity is impossible without growth.  With a rising population, without growth, what prosperity there is will need to be rationed more and more strictly until the socialist ideal of equal poverty for all is reached.  (It is not for nothing that conservatives believe that environmentalists are green on the outside and pink on the inside.)  “Prosperity without growth” is conceptually ridiculous and is simply another formulation of the discredited theory of Malthus.

The reason for the season has nothing to do with indulging in economic excess.  It has to do with joy in something.  And shopping and gift giving are sources of joy in human beings.  Perhaps there should be a limit on the amount of joy one can have, but the reason for that limit is that excess of one kind of joy can bring a deficiency of joy or other good in another aspect of life.  If there is an economic benefit to human beings indulging in joy, sobeit: that benefit turns into a cause of joy in others by accident.  Joy is the cause of many virtuous circles.

Asceticism is about the excessive quenching of joy.  To say that Black Friday is bad because it is harmful to the planet is not only absurd on its face but is also a straightforward effort to quench the joy of the season.  That the quality of the season should be green, not black, is not only absurd but completely misses the point.  There is humor in the expression “Black Friday,” and humor is a source of joy.

There ought to be joy at this time of year, and people ought to be more than superficially mindful about why there should be.  Being green, and bowing to the strange theology around Gaia isn’t it.

-30-

No comments:

Post a Comment