Environmentalism is the Enemy of Freedom

Environmentalism is the enemy of freedom. Could I have made a more outrageous, politically incorrect statement?  Do I hate this beautiful earth that God gave us to live on and to make our homes on?  Do I hate children that I want them to grow up breathing filthy air and drinking polluted water?

Those questions (accusations really) are exactly what keeps the majority of people cowed, afraid to protest when they see their neighbors robbed of their freedom and their property rights in the name of the "Environment". After all, what sort of creep want bad air and water?

Environmentalism, however, is not about clean air and water. There are two types of environmentalists:  Those who are pulling the strings and those well intended, but brainwashed fools who do their bidding. Go to the top and you find the American Conservancy, the Audobon Society, the Sierra Club, the Re-Wilding Institute and other less prominent groups.  When you read their websites, they are all goodness and glory, saving this, saving that, preserving for the future.  BUT their long terms goals all move in the same direction: get people off the land and herded into cities. They bully, bribe and blackmail to get "conservation easements" that render farm land and forests non productive and uncared for. Farm land that used to feed the nation now grows weeds.  Forests that used to be thinned with healty animal habitat and beautiful places for family outings and camping trips are now behind locked gates, with dead and dying trees that used to be removed now building fuel for massive forest fires.

One group, Rewilding.org, is dedicated to reintroducing and introducing, large carnivores to north America.  The success of the wolf re-population is evident every day in the shrinking deer and elk herds and increasing attacks on cattle that are threatening the survival of smaller ranchers. As these protected wolves increase, so are the incidents of them stalking children and attacking humans. Dogs are cats are killed on site by wolves, who are fearless predators and are moving closer and closer to towns and cities. Increasing grizzly populations are also impacting grazing animal herds both wild and domestic and attacks on humans are more frequent.  If you have never been face to face with a wild bear, you cannot imagine the terror.  There is a group wanting to cultivate lions, elephants and other species in North America http://rewilding.org/pdf/Pleistocene-Re-wildingNorthAmerica1.pdf.  The bottom line, is that these groups are big, well funded, and anti-human.  It is their common goal to remove people from the land and return the land to a complete wild state, redesigned somewhat from the way God did it into their own vision of perfection.

A method they are using successfully to achieve their long term goals is pressuring for environmental laws. These laws range from using the EPA to make existence of industry increasingly difficult and chasing jobs away from America, to harassment, fines and jail for individual land owners who may pull a fallen tree from a stream on his own property. They are working hand in hand with UNESCO to create wildlife corridors and biospheres that are human free.  Their disdain for humanity is clear in every law they get passed, in every result that reduces our ability to live and to be free. The time has come to recognize these evil groups and their idiot, self-destructive minions for what they are: destroyers of freedom, of jobs, of America and of humans.  Yes, we all want to take care of this beautiful world God has given us, but not by our own destruction. Find the courage to stand up and say you oppose environmentalism then say why!

---

I usually use the prefix radical when discussing them and usually precede that with wacko.  Conservation of natural resources is good.  I'd be happy if these groups would buy the land they are so worried about and do with it what they will.  Oh, and let them take responsibility when their land becomes the source for wildfires or wild animal attacks due to poor land management practices.  All of the environmental groups have their issues.  Ducks Unlimited has been pretty good historically in taking a sane and reasoned approach to conservation and wildlife management.  To a lesser degree, so has the Nature Conservancy.  At least, they usually try to buy the land to preserve it rather than lobbying for legislation that destroys property rights of others.

---

FeedFwd said: I usually use the prefix radical when discussing them and usually precede that with wacko.  Conservation of natural resources is good.  I'd be happy if these groups would buy the land they are so worried about and do with it what they will.  Oh, and let them take responsibility when their land becomes the source for wildfires or wild animal attacks due to poor land management practices.  All of the environmental groups have their issues.  Ducks Unlimited has been pretty good historically in taking a sane and reasoned approach to conservation and wildlife management.  To a lesser degree, so has the Nature Conservancy.  At least, they usually try to buy the land to preserve it rather than lobbying for legislation that destroys property rights of others.

 

As often as not, they are getting the government to buy the land with our tax dollars so we, taxpayer, can be locked out it.  Wolves, bears and other predators don't stay in the preserves.  They roam onto private property where people will be jailed for protecting their livestock against these beasts. The predators are becoming increasingly dangerous as they continue to lose their fear of people.  Reports of wolves stalking children are becoming more frequent.  Environmentalists and "Animal Rights" radicals hate humans, plain and simple. Read some of their quotes posted in another thread.

---

I believe you both bought into the Bob Dole hype. Inviromental Protection is necessary. Some of them are extreme, but they start out with the extreme and settle for much less. Just think they keep a welfare program, active for college graduates in the conservation and animal research field. Much like NASA. does for Space Sciences.

If it were not for those fields, where would any college graduates find a job. Certainly not in Industry.

They are retraining Engineers to be WalMart Greeters now.

Radical environmentalism is a major part of conceding our land, our sovereignty and our country to the United Nations.  Private property is the enemy of socialism.  Environmentalists with lawsuits, bribery and bullying are damaging the ownership of private property in a BIG way.  In the end, who benefits?  The forest animals who die horrible deaths in uncontrollable wildfires?  The forests themselves?  Once productive fields now overrun with knappweed (from Malaysia)?  The lakes choked with Milfoil? The landowner, bullied, intimidated, fined and sometimes jailed for normal activity such as cutting a tree or digging a drainage ditch on his own property?  The taxpayer who is being bled dry with taxes to persecute himself?

NO!  I'll tell you who benefits.  The big trilateralist run government benefits.  We have multiple massive federal bureaucracies that oversee environmental issues including the Forest Service, whose employees used to be qualified foresters and are now half trained environmentalists, Fish and Wildlife, Park Service, which used to manage parks, Fish and Game, the EPA, the list goes on.  Huge, stupid bureaucracies that lock the public out of public lands, set public lands and nearby towns up for massive forest fires, and put such absurd regulatory requirements on industy that it is another reason to move it off shore. This benefits the people not a whit, just costs us billions more in mismanaged tax dollars, lost jobs, being forced to accept more crappy imported food and more lost freedom.  Shall we even ponder the Constitutional violations here?

---

We went to the Grand Canyon this year and it cost $50. just to drive through.  I was flabbergasted.  Then we decided we could save a few $'s if we camped for the night instead of going to a motel.  After paying $50.  for two cars because we were traveling tandom during our relocation they wanted another $29+ because I had a trailer behind my truck just to camp, and that would be for both vehicles.  Guess where we stayed that night, and not at the canyon motel.  I couldn't imagine what they would charge there, if you were able to get in? I had been to the Grand Canyon 16 years prior to this incident.  There was no fee to drive in, and we parked our R.V also for no charge. What amazed me most was that there were so many vehicles in the park that when you decided to stop and look around, parking was limited to a hike to the canyon views. I calculated just by the random count that I did, that $100's of thousands are being brought in daily just from the entrance fee.  Another freedom we're losing  that should be covered by our tax dollars should it not?

Algebra, is the tragedy of the commons a myth?

Gerald, Why should somebody who never visitied and never plans to vist the grand canyon and has no interest in it pay taxes to support and maintain it?  Why not user fees?  Maybe the user fees are exhorbitant or maybe they are used partially for other purposes, but at least the people using and enjoying the park are paying for it.

---

FeedFwd said:

Algebra, is the tragedy of the commons a myth?

Gerald, Why should somebody who never visitied and never plans to vist the grand canyon and has no interest in it pay taxes to support and maintain it? Why not user fees? Maybe the user fees are exhorbitant or maybe they are used partially for other purposes, but at least the people using and enjoying the park are paying for it.

 

Your point is taken. It was just frustrating, because I had been there before and just to get there it is a horseshoe loop if you go in one way about 50 miles, and out the other the same distance, which was our intention. Also, I did not notice any improvements to the park from my last visit 16 years prior, in fact many things needed attention. Since they're pulling in well over $100,000. a day during peak season, you'd think there would be some amenities for a $50. per vehicle, and they charge significantly more for R.V.'s or busues. Something, besides just being able to use the restroom facilities, and look over the rim. I felt gouged. Although I did find out that if you're a senior citizen you can visit the National Parks website and they'll issue you a special senior citizens permit which drastically reduces entry costs. Just a forewarning if any of you are planning a visit to any National Park. Do your homework first, or you may be disappointed as we were. They charge for everything these days. As things go I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future there will be pay toilets also. I cannot be sure, but I'd be almost willing to place a bet that these environmentalist agencies have their fingers and hands into this.

FeedFwd, I would happily answer you if I had a clue of what the: "tragady of the commons" was.

Conservatism, conservation and environmentalism in the sense of carrying capacity and saving natural places and resources, understanding ecology, and human greed to destroy what is owned by the public--these are not the environmentalism/globalism/liberal bastardization.  Theodore Roosevelt was a good Republican, and the father of real environmentalism in the USA.   You CAN be a "Green" (or camo) Republican!!!   Most hunters and fishermen already are, and deep down know it, and that they are financing balance of game and habitat.  It is too bad that there is less and less room to hunt, and fewer in the next generation to learn nature.   Mix overpopulation, over-immigration/liberalism, with greed and stupidity, and this is what we get.

Claiming environmentalism is the enemy of freedom is as big a mistake as calling Teddy Roosevelt a democrat.  In reality, too many people is the enemy of freedom.  Thank Ted Kennedy and LBJ, and RINOs. 

---