The greens are an ideaological bunch aren’t they. Feel good policies without considering the consequences. I recently came across a particulary disturbing green dream, zero growth. Surely they’re not this insane? Right? This article, published in GreenMag, discusses this ambition of the green movement.
“Warning the public that there are natural and social limits to economic growth which we cross at our peril, and promoting alternative policies, have motivated Green parties in New Zealand, Australia, and around the world, ever since… I think it would be fair to say that Greens have made almost no headway in shifting the thinking and practice of governing elites or the general public away from their mindless promotion and acceptance of economic growth as both the means and end of the ‘good society’.”
Nick O’Malley and David Humphries of fairfax point out this aspect of Bob Brown’s politics.
“Instead, the entire economic and financial system would need to be reinvented. Brown won’t say it so simply, but what the Greens advocate is not socialism, it is an economy that does not grow…With control of the Senate looming, Brown at first seems hesitant to discuss these ideas, too. Only when prompted does he concede that Daly’s and Jackson’s ideas on steady state economics are central to the Greens’ worldview.'”
Professor Michael Fox recalls Maurice Strong, the man responsible for the IPCC, attacking western society at a conferance in Brazil in 1992.
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
This is the extremes of the green movement, those whom co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore regards as “antihuman”. He regards them as being closer to neo-marxism than environmentalism, determined to pursue “ever more extreme” views in an effort to “remain confrontational”. He points out the following characteristics of the green movement.
“Tend strongly to be anti-human, anti-science and technology, anti-trade and anti-capitalism, anti-business, anti-civilization (and) invariably misleading”
Damning criticism from the man who left greenpeace while they were trying to ban chlorine worldwide.
I agree that we need to use the earth’s resources in a manner that is sustainable, but the best way to do that is not to limit economic growth, but to limit population growth. Looking at all the developed nations of Earth, they have minimal population growth when you exclude migration. Clearly then, development in the third world is the key to minimising population growth in the long term. It is the most equitable way to go and it is also the right thing to do, for humans and the environment. The most polluting nations on earth (excluding carbon dioxide emissions) are those that are less able to take care of themselves, much less their environment. In the west, we have pollution controls, more efficient industrial and agricultural practises and our greater affluence allows us to be more environmentally conscious.