Ayn Rand Institute's Neo Nazi Forestry web page!

Paul Bramscher brams006 at tc.umn.edu
Tue Oct 31 17:10:09 EST 2000


You completely miss the point.  In addition, I wouldn't extrapolate from
"some people take care of the environment" to "everyone takes care of the
environment."  Look around you, travel the country, and witness otherwise.

Langrrr wrote:

> In article <39FDBAA2.F3CE3D0B at tc.umn.edu>,
>   Paul Bramscher <brams006 at tc.umn.edu> wrote:
> > 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)
>
> Wrong, as evidenced by countless individuals who have performed
> excellent stewardship on their properties.
>
> > (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
>
> Wrong, as evidenced by the countless individuals who have worked hard
> to attract species to their property.
>
> > (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.
> >
>
> Wrong, as evidenced by man's milleniums long "experiment" with the
> domestication of animals and plants for food.
>
> > The problem is that #1 is obviously untrue, #2 clashes with any
> scientific
> > definition of an ecosystem and #3 presents moral/ethical dilemas.
> >
>
> Actually, the problem is that all three premises are inherently flawed.
>
> > The upshot is that, since our ecosystem is by nature a shared entity,
> our
> > stewardship therefore must be shared.
>
> Riddle me this, Mr. Bramscher.  Is man, or is man not, an animal which
> is part of an ecosystem?
>
> >   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.
>
> I see - so the concept of the "will" escapes you?  Codicils?  Land
> trusts?
>
> But of course they would - perhaps you are not aware that the
> inheritance tax has been one of the more environmentally destructive
> forces at work in the United States, precisely because it does force
> heirs to sell land to pay for them?
>
> I offer up my grandfather as proof of the incorrectness of your
> assertion.  He labored long and hard for the proper stewardship of his
> piece of property, and he did it not only for his pleasure but for the
> legacy that would remain long after his death.
>
> > 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!
> >
> >
>
> And I find the statists' approach to the environment to be
> annihilative.  We'll take what's yours regardless of your need or
> record, and fail to live up to their management responsbilities because
> they haven't the proper resources or incentive to do so.
>
> You'll note that the worst environmental degradation has always
> occurred in media that are not solely owned - national forests in the
> United States and Russia, oil spills, air pollution.
>
> And yet what's your answer?  More of the same!
>
>  - Andrew Langer
>
> --
> Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
> enjoyment (and the education of others).  Unless expressly stated,
> they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
>  or entities.  He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.






More information about the Ag-forst mailing list