There’s this myth—before western civilization created science, machines, industry, and capitalism, man lived in harmony with his brothers, with nature, and with his God. BS. It was a dirty, filthy, rotten and horrid time of disease, stench, and misery, And this is the gift of love the environmentalists want to give us. To hell with that. Take your rancid gift and stuff it where the stench won’t be noticed. https://humanprogress.org/article.php?p=1745
I slightly disagree with your take on the article. When man was a hunter gatherer he did indeed live in harmony with nature but he also died of impacted teeth and broken bones so there is that. It was in the early stages of industrialization when man crowded together in cities that quality of life diminished rapidly with pollution of air and water and open sewage in muddy streets. We then moved into full bore industrialization with toxic chemicals freely dumped into rivers and belching smoke stacks which is where countries like China are today. Older industrialized countries like the US have indeed learned to have much cleaner industry and we have been cleaning up our act for decades now and in a fashion are having our cake and eating it too. Our problem now is we are victims of our own success and are expanding at such a rapid rate that we have less and less natural environment for other species to thrive in. There is more trouble on the horizon if we continue down this road.
Oh. My mistake, the environmentalist don’t want take is back to the Dark Ages, they want to return us to the Stone Age. Ah, no thanks. Capitalism, industry, and technology did not create poverty and pollution, it inherited then from the mysticism of the Dark Ages. And, it is still a myth that a long, long, long, time ago Man lived a pampered universe in peace and prosperity with his fellow beings, until he became a selfish gas guzzling capitalist. The progress of Man is the struggle of the individual vs the tribe--and it is written on the land, in the air, over the seas, and into space; from private homes to towering skyscrapers, from single seat gliders to Dreamliner jets, from cabin cruisers to cruise ships, from Gemini to SpaceShipTwo, the power of the creative mind, freed from the shackles of tribal superstitions and oppression, has lifted us to Heaven on earth.
Well let's concentrate on this sentence which is the crux of your argument. "capitalism industry, and technology did not create poverty and pollution" First let's take capitalism. As opposed to any other socioeconomic structure I'll agree that capitalism has contributed to pollution no more than and probably less than communism and socialism and feudalism for that matter. Capitalism allowed wealth to be accumulated at the fastest pace and by the most people. Prosperity led to education which led to more wealth and if you combine these three elements you get a population both interested in and capable of cleaning up past industrial pollution and lessening any current negative effects of industrialization. The only place capitalism bears more blame lies in the fact that the earliest therefore dirtiest industrialization was based on capitalism. Now let's look at did industry and technology create poverty and pollution. Poverty here is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to hunter gatherer societies. True they had only the possessions necessary for survival with little if any frivolous items except art work which they seemed to have the time and desire to create. Beautiful decorated clothes and baskets of American Indians would fall into this category. Poverty created by industrialization was a different beast altogether. In that poverty people live in filthy conditions with little food and lots of crime. Now for pollution it seems rather obvious. Before industrialization the environment was indeed pristine if you don't count buffalo deficating in streams trampling and fouling them to the point they were not palatable which was an issue early white explorers ran into. There were no toxic chemicals though in either air of water so yeah I'd say pollution is definitely related to industrialization. As for going back to stone age hunter gatherer societies that may well be our future either due to our own transgression and causing collapses of ecosystems due to overpopulation and ever expanding industrialization of it might be from yet another ice age of asteroid hit or....... In any case man is not willingly going back to Hunter gatherer societies. We are what we are and it's in our nature to always seek an easier more comfortable life but acknowledgement of the fact that industrialization is like most other things in life a double edged sword is just reality
First: Reread and tell me your error. It's there. You'll find it. (Hint: Words are conceptual tools; it is wise not use them carelessly) Now, some might argue that it was better living life as an Indian with painted blankets, wigwams, and colorful clothing and baskets, then I-phones, HD TV, and Lamborghinis, after all, just stopping car production and usage would save 1.5 million a year worldwide...from auto accidents. But then again, how many are saved because of the speed, utility, and convenience of motor transportation? Just what would be the life expectancy of someone you love having appendicitis, and having to travel 3 days to get them medical help? Low to non-existence? Which brings me to your next error, You accept that what it's all about is the community, the nation, the human race, mankind, the collective, the spotted owl, the tree toad, or some future medical miracles from an Amazon Purple Beetle or Angel Trumpet. But it's not. It's about one idea, and one idea only: Because Man needs to think to live, it is morally proper he be free to think for himself to live his life to its fullest potential. It is the capitalist using the knowledge gained by science, together with the businessman, bringing that applied science in the form of useful and wonderful goods to market, combined with the individual decisions of the participants in the market that will make life on earth, paradise. Not the lovers of Condors wringing their hands over the possible extinction of a New Mexico jumping mouse. Leave man free, and he will surely rise to greet the many sunrises of the many tomorrows that he creates.
Difference between us is I am speaking strictly based on irrefutable fact and you are speaking from emotion. If you read my last post carefully you will see we basically agree but I acknowledge the dark side which you want to ignore in your emotion based defense of industrialization. I defend industrialization based on logic not emotion so I can look at it without passion and examine it from all sides. Good side is on a hot summer day I'm cruising down the road in my air conditioned pickup listening to music on my stereo instead of sitting on a horse in the blazing sun swatting at flies. Dark side is all the pollution caused by both manufacturing and operating my pickup and all the paved roads destroying natural habitat. It's the price you pay for comfort and convenience but also needs to be balanced against environmental concerns so we don't pave the whole world over. Also if you read my previous post again you will see my acknowledgement of medical advances and my statement that we no longer die from dental problems and broken bones. If there's a dark side here it would be cancers, heart disease, diabetes, obesity etc brought on by our new easy lives. As I said the sword of civilization and industrialization cuts both ways.
Ok. First the error, I never posted that industry didn't have pollution, I stated that whatever pollution came with industrialization, it was exponentially better than the Dark Ages, and its machinery and automation made life better than any possible existence in the Stone Age. Second, here's a fact, thank goodness for Ford, Edison, Rockefeller, Gates, Jobs, and way too many others to mention. Their ability to make a buck, makes my life immeasurably healthier and wealthier, in spirit as well as in the flesh. Also, let me express my emotional gratitude to those who make life on Earth, wonderful: the scientist, the capitalist, and the businessman. Thank you. And lastly, the only dark side to reaching for the stars is that infinity may not be long enough to touch them all
Imagine, if you will, capitalistic industrialization as a pill. The doctor gives you the pill and tells you, "You will live a healthy life 3x better and longer than your present state of being, but then its "kiss your ass goodbye." Do you take it? I say of course. You know why? I know one day the capitalist will finance a better pill. Why? Because it will make them money, honey. Now imagine a hippie shaman telling you, "Pill no good. Drink magic tea with magic herps while I say the magic word, 'Gia, Gia, Gia."' You will die, but that's best for Mother Nature." Do you skip the pill as a sacrifice to Mother Nature because you worship the dung beetle, but not the jet? (Manmade crap, don't you know.) Hmmm. Not even close, for me. How about you?
I'm in the middle. I appreciate both modern industrialization and the beauty and wonderfulness of nature and I believe with care and proper management we can have both.
Agreed, but not at the point of the government’s gun. Reason is life for man, without it, nature is man’s protagonist. Personally, a skyscraper is far beautiful than any mountain on Earth. Why. Mountains are accidents, skyscrapers are creations of the human mind, i.e., manmade.
Well to each his own but I'll take a mountain any day. As for the governments gun I'll agree that radical environmentalist have used difference species as a weapon to stop any and all development and I'm not one of those. In fact I'm a retired life long logger, a member of the most hated group on the planet by these radicals and they used the spotted owl to decimate our industry in the PNW. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate nature though and love to hunt and fish in beautiful secluded environments. Doesn't mean I don't love nature and that's probably why I live in a very remote cabin off grid miles from my nearest neighbor.
Well, I certainly agree to each his own, but, again, I’ll take an amusement park any day over a botanical garden. Nature frigging sucks. It’s either too hot or too cold; it’s either raining on your picnic or snowing on your commute; it’s ripping homes apart with tornados or flooding them off their foundations with hurricane strikes; it’s wild fires, earthquakes, or tsunamis. Nature is not are friends, it’s an indifferent force that man has mastered. And thank goodness for that.
Interesting perspective and not without merit but some of us enjoy being out in the elements taking nature as it comes and recognizing it's beauty and danger. In fact sometimes the danger and hardship is the beauty.
