Ayn Rand Institute's Neo Nazi Forestry web page!

Paul Bramscher brams006 at tc.umn.edu
Mon Oct 30 13:14:58 EST 2000

Langrrr wrote:

> > The environment and individual do not equate.
> Completely and utterly wrong.  I urge you to read, "Liberty, Ecology,
> and Property", a collection of essays edited by Jonathan Adler.

The individual and environment equate only when three conditions are met
(1) The individual is immortal (nobody else has to inherit his stewardship
-- or lack therof) (2) When no other living creature or inorganic material
is allowed to pass in or out of his property, spatially.  That is, it is an
island universe, an ecosystem utterly separated from the outside world and
(3) If you dispense with all kinds of ethics: animal rights, bioethics,
extinction, etc. for that imaginery, isolated, ecosystem.  In a sense, the
land is a restricted bubble, both in terms of space and time, an island,
and whatever is done -- or not done -- has no impact on anything else.

The problem is that #1 is obviously untrue, #2 clashes with any scientific
definition of an ecosystem and #3 presents moral/ethical dilemas.

The upshot is that, since our ecosystem is by nature a shared entity, our
stewardship therefore must be shared.  It is obviously shared by the simple
act of death: whatever you THINK is your private property will be stripped
away from you when you cease, and it becomes somebody else's problem.
That's the time component.  The spatial component is more difficult for
Libertarians to comprehend, but it recognizes modern understanding of an
integrated ecosystem, in which no part can be partitioned off -- poor
management causes an effect on the rest of the system.

I find a Libertarian's approach to the environment to be carnivorous: it's
mine by right, I'll take it, do as I please with it, and to hell with
whatever anyone else says.

If only the world were so large and our lives immortal!

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list