Monday, July 16, 2007

Anti-Humanism Gaining Traction

Here we go again. Newsweek reports--in surprisingly positive terms--on the movement to rid the earth of the vermin species--us:

Environmentalists have their own eschatology--a vision of a world not consumed by holy fire but returned to ecological balance by the removal of the most disruptive species in history. That, of course, would be us, the 6 billion furiously metabolizing and reproducing human beings polluting its surface. There's even a group trying to bring it about, the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, whose Web site calls on people to stop having children altogether...And "four out of five" of the people he's told about it, he estimates, thought the idea sounded wonderful. Since we're headed inexorably toward an environmental crash anyway, why not get it over cleanly and allow the world to heal?

Over time, though, Weisman's attitude toward the rest of humanity softened, as he thought of some of the beautiful things human beings have accomplished, their architecture and poetry, and he eventually arrived at what he views as a compromise position: a worldwide, voluntary agreement to limit each human couple to one child. This, says Weisman--who is 60, and childless after the death of his only daughter--would stabilize the human population by the end of the century at about 1.6 billion, approximately where it was in 1900. And then, perhaps, more of the world could resemble Varosha, the beach resort in Cyprus in the no man's land between the Greek and Turkish zones, where, Weisman writes, thickets of hibiscus, oleander and passion lilac grow wild and houses disappear under magenta mounds of bougainvillea.
The anti-human movement--lets call it anti-humanism--is clearly gaining traction when an MSM outlet of the caliber of Newsweek reports positively about the "intriguing thought experiment" of doing away with all people. To me, respecting such notions--even if in a bemused manner--is a disturbing symptom of a view that evolves all too easily from the abandonment of human exceptionalism.

Besides, if all the people were gone and earth did return to an alleged paradise: What difference would it make? Only human beings give meaning to the beauty of nature. Only human beings appreciate the grandeur of fauna and flora. Only human beings have stepped sufficiently outside of nature to be able to look back at it as something worth protecting. Indeed, were we to disappear, the remaining denizens of the meaningless planet would just go on and on, suffering through the brutal and desperate tooth and claw struggle for survival utterly indifferent to the awesome beauty that our elimination would bequeath.

Labels:

7 Comments:

At July 16, 2007 , Blogger Gregory L. Ford said...

Makes me think of those charming misanthropists at the Church of Euthanasia, whose slogans include "Save the planet, kill yourself." The real question is what they find so inherently valuable about the Earth that they'd rather we all die than it be tainted; it's a weird kind of puritanism, if you ask me.

 
At July 16, 2007 , Blogger Ricardo said...

This post has been removed by the author.

 
At July 16, 2007 , Blogger Ricardo said...

It's sad that they believe they will "stabilize" the worlds population... are these guys for real? LMAO THe U.N has already anounced that the worlds population is gonna stabilize somewhere in this century, and scheduled to fall a bit from then on...

Here's a good article http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0500overpopulation.htm

But still this is actually good news.. in the future my kids wont have to put up with these idiot's kids! :D

 
At July 17, 2007 , Blogger John Howard said...

And meanwhile, these same people are pro-cloning, pro-eternal life, pro-organ donation, pro-spending maximum amounts of money on research, pro-IVF, but surprisingly indifferent to funding basic health care so that people can live with a good quality of life for their normal lifespan. It seems it isn't that they want the world completely depopulated, just depopulated of other less interesting people.

 
At July 17, 2007 , Blogger Jimmy the Dhimmi said...

"...Weisman--who is 60, and childless after the death of his only daughter..."

This may provide a clue to the emotional issues surrounding the motivation for this man's lunacy.

 
At July 21, 2007 , Blogger BACC Family & Life Committee said...

"The Movement may be considered a success each time one more of us volunteers to breed no more."

Do you think this is what Darwin had in mind when he spoke of natural selection?

 
At January 19, 2009 , Blogger Scaea said...

Humans are not the only species that "give meaning to the beauty of nature." Such a thought is so incredibly arrogant. Do you honestly believe that we are the only creatures with "personalities". If so, you have never known a dog.
Or cat.
Or salamander.
We are constantly finding that our assumption that we are somehow 'special' is wrong. Many scientists are not thinking that elephants and dolphins have full language! Meaning that they can communicate any weird idea. Even if it's original and nonsensical. Such as: "I see a flying paper clip delivering bags of orange irises to toad-men!"
Other creatures experience pain and pleasure and can find meaning in things. Just as easily as we can.
How could they not, really?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home