Environmental Movement & The Road to Subsistence

I would like to premise the following comments by acknowledging the necessity for humans to integrate their actions with natural systems. There have been damaging effects requiring address from the industrialization of the world. To think human’s actions, as humans now exist, can occur without effecting change on the plant would be lunacy. As human understanding continues to grow at a startling pace, greater opportunities are presenting themselves that will permit us to enjoy abundant lives in harmony with natural systems.  

Having been born on a farm in British Columbia and then through the course of my working life being exposed to the natural world, the state of the environment is a point of concern and contemplation. The environment, particularly as it concerns humanity’s healthy existence needs to take priority in the minds of the entire world’s population. Bold and “truthful” assessment of the environment situation needs to occur. Focused debate on the next steps toward human harmony with nature still needs to take place. While there is consensus that the environment is challenged; the rhetoric we are hearing from the extreme elements of the environmental movement is questionable at best. It’s apparent at times there is a religiosity associated with some in the environmental movement, accompanied by the indoctrination of recruits rather than their edification. This is evidenced by the hostility encountered at the mere inquiry as to the credibility of claims forwarded by some.   

Nature to me is the smell of pine drifting across my path on an August day in the high country. The smell of fresh cut wood, pungent in contrast to ambient olfactory condition. Nature is alpine flowers in July, ephemeral beauty. Nature is the excitement, as a flicker of a white tail passes from view. Nature is hours spent astride a horse and watching the county pass by. Nature is the bite of a cold winter wind, the shiver from an early spring rain. Nature is bold beautiful and powerful, comforting and intimidating. I’ve spent my finest moments in life at the whim of nature, crisp October morning giving way to an afternoon’s nap against a south facing rock. I’ve quacked at the rustle of a bear in the bush. I wondered to find my way when a flat piece of county on a cloudy day stole my sense of direction. I have spent time with nature and felt bound to it and grown to love it, making an emotional bond. I feel I understand it and appreciate it as well as anybody. Given this intimacy I’ve developed with nature, when I hear someone speak of protecting “nature” my ears prick up. When, however, I hear someone prostituting nature to promote bygone political objectives, I become deeply offended. 

Far too often I’ve turned my head toward individuals expounding with save the earth rhetoric from the heart of urbansville, only to hear every word they say underpinned by ulterior motive. When they say “cap and trade”, they really mean enforce monetary equality. When they say “100 Mile Diet” they really mean down with world trade. When they say “community managed forest” the really me stop logging. When the say save the earth, they really mean stop everything, freeze it all, stop society dead in it’s economic tracks. The constant salvo of urbanized thinkers trampling on the progress of humanity in the absence of an aft-ward glance is offensive and most certainly frightening. As Winston Churchill said, “the further back you look the further ahead you see”, and when I look backward to when nature had the full sway, humanity was a small ship on a rough ocean. The modern world has brought both promise and pearl to be sure. The reality is we are the earth’s stewards now, and we are expanding, and we need to harvest nature’s generous bounty. Nature exists in a changing landscape; a new road can be viewed as a scare or as a mode of transport. There is a critical balance to be had to be sure, one needs to be cognisant of result of our actions, but action is necessary; more than necessary it is exciting and filled with opportunity. This opportunity needs to be pursued with a clear mind however, informed by clear information. The environmental message has lost resolution and fidelity, as it has been appropriated by social interest.          

 

The modern western population is now predominately urban people who possess an idealistic view of nature. In grade school they were told about the “balance” of nature, how as a rodent population exceeds it food supply and they die off from starvation, and other examples of predator’s populations declining in response to predator over hunting of prey. Nature is a mass of happenstance and these are examples are demonstrative of inherent imbalance as opposed to balance, anthropogenic interventions in the form of mindful stewardship can mitigate these fluctuations by integrating natural processes in human action. Anthropogenic intervention can enhance natural processes through the course of human endeavour. The view of human action on the ground needs to be transformed in the minds of people, from the shroud of detriment to the realization human endeavour is integrally natural. A road built blind to the requirements of nature is a scare on the land; a road built mindful of nature serves to enhance human endeavour and maintains or enhances natural processes.

The Dali Lama teaches us to “avoid putting a goats head on a yaks body”. This is precisely what many social activists are doing to the environmental movement. You might say the environmental body has been given a social activists head in the origination of actions, but when the head is a talking it finds its expression as the yak, and now the goat has become a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The wolfs are the authors of the environmental manifesto and the builders of the road to subsistence.  

The Scarcity Doctrine 

It is the intention of writer to bring to light to a corrosive element that has appropriated the environmental movement in a manner that has the environmental movement in conflict with the western mode of life. In doing so, this corrosive element is undermining support for the valid efforts of the environmental movement and impairing important change, while attacking the most liberating and vital element of western life, a market based economy. Environment, prosperity and liberty are ours for the taking if we embrace the sheer abundance of the earth and shun with vigour the indoctrination of scarcity that is being propagated by the subversive redistributionist elements. These elements which have co-opted the environmental movement are elements subversive to people’s efforts as environmentalists and subversive to our way of life and interaction. The concept of “scarce resources” flows from the school of economics, it is amazing to me how so many people who promote themselves as “green” have appropriated scarcity to service their view on redistribution under the vale of “environmental necessities”, and yet some how managed to ignore the abundance the rest of the school of economics addresses. Scarcity then has blended together under two banners, social activism and environmentalism. In the first case it is a red herring and in the second it is damaging to the cause.

Scarcity has found prominence in the human psyche because the human psyche has evolved in a position of ignorance to natural processes and hence in subservience to nature. Scarcity comes naturally to humans because hitherto it has occupied much of human existence. Even in times of human abundance, humans find comparative scarcity. The environmental movement is capitalizing on the human inclination to accept scarcity as a reality, what they are failing to realize is that people will accept scarcity in abstract terms; however, when scarcity takes action and people are faced with a reduction in living experience, people will repel scarcity and the environmental moment with it. Environmentalism must be presented and actuated, in the spirit of and with the acceptance of the presence of abundance, to find resonance with the population.

  

In the world of environomics scarcity lives large in the lexicon and finds expression in terms like “we need to respect the earth’s limits”. Limits occupy the minds of the enviro-economist, every expression of concern that emanates from them seems to be preoccupied with limits. This is evident in the “solutions” they propose. Often when there is a suggestion to utilise resources, it seems there is a misguided person opposing it on the limits of nature, as their minds have been bathed with an interpretation of reality that inaccurately limits human action as a result of misperception of the earth’s capacity being finite as a provider, when infinite abundance is the fact.

Scarcity is a tool used by redistributionist elements to justify redistribution itself. In believing the pie is a fixed size they justify taking from people with wealth to give to the people absent wealth. In reality however, the pie is infinite and persons absent wealth are better served by the expansion of the pie and wide access, than by redistributionist policy.

The environmental movement’s desire for conservation has been appropriated and transferred to scarcity doctrine by the redistributionists. This action serves to attract people to their cause under the guise of environmental concerns, when equality concerns are at the heart of their action. One can debate the appropriateness of equality as laudable societal goal, what is outside debate is the negative effect it is having on the environmental movements efforts. As one who shares environmental concern, I reject out right both the effectiveness and premises for redistribution; so this elements presence in the environmental movements ranks repels me; a source of remorse given my alignment with many aspects of the environmental movement.      

When you examine the “solutions” to “problems” posited by many people associated with the environmental movement as with the redistributionist movement, you find scarcity at the root of their thought processes, resulting in them suggesting constraint of human action as a solution. They want to move us to have and use less. Prudent use of resources is wise, if you need to drive to hospital use a smart car, but go to the hospital. The environmental movement wants to constrain human action, fly less, see less and do less. Certainly, if you can have a wonderful home and can heat it more efficiently, you should, the environmental movement are all too often saying, to do without the nice home. Certainly there are facets of consumerism that are frivolous and their adjustment would serve all concerned. This is hardly a basis to rebuke a mode of interaction that has provided us with historically unparalleled abundance, that mode of interaction being trade supported by a market based system. The legitimate concerns of environmentalism are by challenged  by allowing the anti market economy movement to attach itself to environmentalism’s shirt tails. The perception by people who believe in a market economy as the engine for society, begin to attach rhetoric that attacks their way of life with concerns expressed about the environment. The environmental movement needs to bring resolution to their message, specifying issues of nature in a manner that both allows others to “do business” and engage in actions in accord with natures demands.           

         

The sum of human action is without limit by our natural environment. Humanities opportunity for an ever richer existence is omnipresent. The environmental movement is fostering a narrative with scarcity at its core, when we exist it ambit of abundance. The answer is outside the cessation of natural resource use, the answer is pursuing a philosophy of abundance with action in accord with nature. Nature is changing, the athropine is here and humans are the catalyst of change. When the sun sets at the close of everyday, the world will be different; this is in most cases good. Adroit human’s action will change the face of the earth while pursuing ever better circumstance for humanity. So by pursuing the multitude of human values, many of which have nature as their genesis, humanity can have abundance in accord with natural requirements. 

   

There exists an infinite supply of energy. Carbon is our friend. Coal is an excellent source of energy. Three statements that would be considered wrong by conventional wisdom in the context of the public at large. A public inculcated by a readily absorbed narrative “the limited environment” would treat this as heresy. The fact is terawatt after terawatt is entering our atmosphere daily. The fact is carbon is our friend; it is the building block of life. Coal is an excellent source of energy. We need only to apply ourselves to the task of developing technologies that allow access to these boundless realities in a manner that is in compliance with the environment at large. 

Choosing a lens to view the world and issues affecting the world is critical to the culture that will ensue. When a lens of scarcity is placed on an issue, all actions are directed toward claiming possession of resources. When a lens of abundance it placed on an issue, all actions move toward expanding resources. When belief that the earth is a place of abundance and alignment is sought with that abundance, the discourse turns from one of staking territory to one of generosity. The financial market lends affirming testament to this reality, when people believe collectively that markets are ascending, a prosperous circumstance ensues and by contrast when people see scarcity, an impoverished circumstance ensues. This cycle of abundant belief and scarcity belief osculates constantly as the abstract measure of human endeavour, the market place, gives expression human perception. As the inclination toward scarcity is so strong in humans due to their evolutionary backdrop, extreme efforts needs to be activated to bolster a view to abundance and with this view as convention, abundance will emerge – this is the self-fulfilling prophesy of abundance. There are two truths relating to environmental stewardship that need attention. Firstly, the earth is an abundant provider with massive capacity and secondly, natural systems (of which humanity is a part) are in constant change. Today’s beautiful mountain is an erupted volcano tomorrow or today’s caterpillar is tomorrow’s butterfly.

The much maligned market economy, inadvertently maligned by environmentalists and intentionally maligned by redistributionists, really is a thing of beauty. The gestalt which has as its parts, democracy, market economy, the work ethic and self interest has given us in Canada abundance absent in human experience ever in prior history, and that prosperity is gradually spreading to the rest of the world. In areas of the world where other systems have been at work, humanity lives at the whim of state and tyrant, where environment degradation has been the rule as opposed to the exception. Compare the United States environmental record with the Soviet Unions, neither is perfect, one is just better than the other’s.

Scarcity is the Environmental redistributionist manifesto, Marx and Engles wrote the communist manifesto to promote access to a fair life for the working peoples of the world, a noble work that ended up promoting a dysfunctional mode of governance. It’s safe to say Marxism was high jacked in much the same way as the environmental movement is being, Marxism by totalitarian authoritarians and the environmentalism by the totalitarian authoritarian’s precursor, Marxists activists. Equality is a stupid goal while equity is a laudable goal. Equality forces the ambitious to pay for the less ambitious and forces the less ambitious to engage life at a tempo they would rather avoid. Equity ensures fair treatment regardless of a person’s chosen life cadence. Society and all its component parts when equitably applied become the sub straight of a liberated person’s chosen life; as a piece of paper is a sub straight and we all may choose to commit to it what we will. Deeply embedded in the environmental movement are social engineers, they are eager to impose scarcity on us all in the name of social justice and “the environment” is their cover. They say to impoverished persons in the emerging world, accept subsistence as your life’s lot as the world is a basket of scarcity. There is another message for the impoverished and that message is that the world is an abundant place and we are seeking to give you access to it. As human beings we owe that to each other.

The Canadian narrative has taken many turns holding to a base of modest and unadventurous in many respects. The mass introduction of scarcity to the Canadian narrative will serve to bridle the minds of our people and impair their progress. The narrative of scarcity and the assault on the foundation of Canadian success, the market place, will turn our country’s minds away from respectful fruitful human endeavour seeking harmony with natural processes, to one of consternation and constraint truly putting us on the road to subsistence.        

The concept of the 100 hundred mile diet is laudable in its spirit. The spirit of reducing foods carbon foot print, while sometimes true it is often untrue depending on the product in question. The side benefit of the 100 mile diet is it promotes local agriculture and related cottage industry, which is an asset to any community. The assertion that we should all seek food in close proximity to our place of residence is flawed for a number of reasons. Often the production environment for food is more favourable in other jurisdictions, requiring fewer inputs to produce, even in considering the transportation carbon emissions,S the food imported has a smaller carbon footprint overall. This is often the case and each food product needs to be judged on it’s own merit, in this way the100 mile diet can be detriment in the context of reducing carbon usage. To advocate contraction of human endeavour as a solution to anything is errant, it only serves to reduce opportunity for access to abundance and solution. Only by broadening our scope of action technologically, geographically and spiritually; by reaching out to all in the universe and drawing on every human thought, every religion, every mode of action, every unique ecosystem, do we find for all of humanity and nature, health and abundance. When a person’s words have in them limit, explore the extremes of that thought process, if somebody suggests to live on food from within 100 miles, how will your life be when they find a way for you to limit your food collection form a square foot. The world’s regions offer us abundance in different forms, by accessing the whole world; each region’s strengths find complementary expression in the world as a whole. This reality provides us with unimaginable abundance, we I walk into a grocery store the entire world’s bounty is represented there. The most important point here is, more than pleasing my pallet, the important point is that by accessing regional strength efficiency ensues, and in efficiency conservation resides and in this case, conservation provides access to abundance. It takes less energy to grow a tomato in California and truck it to Vancouver in December, than it does to grow a tomato in Vancouver in December. The carbon foot print of a leg of New Zealand Lamb is smaller in London than an English leg of Lamb in London.

An interesting mental exercise to illustrate this point; imagine the world absent state boarders and under the direction of a single democracy such as Canada which facilitates a globally similar living standard. In the absence of national interests; where would people live, where would they mine, where would they log, where would the grow food, where would they do all the things they do. There would be very few people in Canada, because living here is expensive relative to more temperate part of the world. Manufacturing would occur in temperate areas where people could live inexpensively and less energy was required it heat manufacturing facilities. The examples are endless, but in removing yourself from nationalism and the constraints of boarders, you can begin the un-bias contemplation of where activities are more logically suited to occur. While a world under Canadian management is a pleasant thought, it is unlikely to occur any time soon, what can occur however, is a moderated reality that seeks optimum utilization of the earth’s resources within the provisions of statehood. We are able, through organisations such as the World Trade Organisation, to orchestrate better use of the earth resources in a manner that harmonises human action with the natural attributes of all region’s environments. The unfettered flow of the substrates of life gives birth to the highest and best use of the earth’s resources, the closer we can move toward a free flow of goods and services, the sooner that humanity as a whole will achieve environmental congruency with the earth. Remember, the earth is a single entity without the ability to distinguish China from the USA, the earth functions absent political bias and is one unified ecosystem artificially segmented by political boarders.

The unfortunate reality at the moment is that energy purchased by currency as opposed to being currency. If the world’s currency were energy, then the natural attributes of the globe would enforce behaviour consistent with less energy use and hence less carbon emissions. The unfortunate reality is that we measure human action in currency and human exchange motivated by currency is distorted by national interest and distortions that emerge from government regulations. While global trade is certainly a boon for the environment, even in it’s present state, the world’s asymmetry of prosperity is conspiring to distort human action in ways that are energy inefficient. It is the asymmetry of prosperity that causes the miss creation of goods in one area of the world, when the goods would be better created closer to their user. One influencing factor, among many, is that the labour cost savings in one area of the world is greater than the additional energy costs to transport the goods.

It is the asymmetry of prosperity that is inhibiting the free flow of goods and services throughout the world and the resulting environmental benefits, as people correctly fear for the erosion of their living standards. Ironically, it is the free flow of goods and services that will, if permitted to take their course, facilitate the homogenization of prosperity world wide. This reality may find expression if western governments mitigate the displacement caused in the reconciliation of the a asymmetry of prosperity. In the free flow of goods and services, environmentalist find resolve through the most prudent deployment of resources and the redistributionists may find equity, if not equality, as the dynamic of world trade takes prosperity around the world. It seems ironic when considered in this context that there is opposition from both groups to liberalized trade. It may be the opposition from the environmental movement is caused by the presence of the redistributionist elements influence, because rational thought on the part of environmentalist’s would have them seeking the most eco efficient means for people to garner goods and services. 

The above discussion considers carbon emissions in the context of the traditional utilization of hydro carbons, which has inherent in it the releasing of carbon from vast reserves of ancient energy. If we tighten the carbon cycle so that carbon released today is absorbed tomorrow, perhaps through the use of bio fuels, then the above point is maybe muted somewhat in the context of energy, but still remains sound in the context of overall utilization of resources.

Environment movement needs to address outcomes, focused on objectives. Sure, pursue a given action on the land; just meet these objectives for the natural environment - rather than permeating the populous’ consciousness with tie-raids on the evening news exclaiming the coming environmental apocalypse, the very same apocalypse I heard them warning about 25 years ago. I wonder how rational people get influenced by people who can exclaim straight faced that construction of a small hydro project is going to spell the end of a liveable environment for the world’s wildlife, when in fact constructing a small hydro project has the potential to enhance the habitat for wild life and create carbon free power. The environment, far from being degraded, is merely transformed and enhanced to serve humans and potentially other flora and fauna as well. If person’s associated with the environmental movement would engage people with objectives to meet that are absent values that are excessively taxing or stemming from values associated with aversion to change in the context of athletics, the general population would be more eager to extend credence to their assertions. In the 1970s I heard people from the environmental movement predicting we would be out of oil by 2000 and the planet would be uninhabitable. Of course 2000 came and went and the world was fine, needing some adjustment of course, by fine nonetheless. Given the aforementioned points and dynamics, when a just environmental concern is presented, the message is met with a Jaundiced eye.

                        Agriculture the realities of scale

“It took some 10,000 years to expand food production to the current level of about 5 billion tons per year. By 2050, we will likely need to nearly double current crop production again.” Norman Borlaug Norman Borlaug received a Noble prize for his contribution to the green revolution. He is probably the most deserving recipient of a Noble prise of any, as modern agriculture has saved more lives than any other human endeavour. He helped to father the modern agriculture complex that supports humanity today.

When one listens too many in the environmental movement, modern agriculture instead of being lauded as humanity’s greatest achievement, it is demonized. While modern agriculture has negative impacts and elements need remediation, it is on the whole a laudable human endeavour. Agriculture is an example of how of human intervention can augment natural processes to create a more productive ecosystem. Agriculture is an integral part the environment that has taken natural systems, enhanced them and fed millions who would otherwise been subject to starvation and all the resulting scourge that accompanies it.

In reviewing literature form organizations such as Greenpeace and other’s, I find them advocating “small farms” for the world’s poor to grow their own food. They are advocating subsistence agriculture as the solution to world poverty. Extending the means to someone to simply subsist in the name of the environment is cruel at least and slow-motion genocide at worst. The land allocated to subsistence agriculture exacerbates the hunger and poverty that exists, as it fragments the land base into small portions unable to access the scale that provides for efficiencies that has driven the green revolution and all the benefit that has accrued from it. In terms of providing food, it is better to retire person’s trapped in subsistence agriculture, provide them with the food they require and distribute via market process increased production from the application of modern agriculture taking place at scales which generates inherently superior productivity. The environment is better served and the population as a whole is better fed.          

The same romanticism that resides in the minds of sentimental preservationists, that has them seeing the world bounded by limit and nature as being fragile, has them viewing the bucolic rural setting with mindless nostalgia. I share the appreciation with of the evening sun’s long shadow cast across rolling hills with the red barn and the gentle twitter of happy children at play in the backyard. Having been born on a farm were family worked together, I often yearn to retreat to that very setting. I know however, that the new family farm has evolved it an agro enterprise and that new structure is what is providing the production necessary to supply 6 billion mouths. In addition to just providing food, the agro complex is delivering food to North Americans at approximately 10% of disposable in come, contributing to the overall economy by leaving funds for discretional spending in the hands of other families. The family farm is an important accruement to the world’s economy, a family farm that profits the family on the farm as opposed to the family farm that indentures families to a life of subsistence. When people extend subsistence to the third world as a solution, all the while lapping up first world amenities, amenities lavish and accepted in almost apathy, it is offensive. It is apparent that in their pursuit of environmental “sustainability”, they are seemingly content to adopt policy that would have all people reside in a state of unnecessary subsistence.

Are there aspects of modern agriculture that need to harmonized with nature, absolutely, there are unethical applications of technology that threaten the very people they are intended to serve. Means are needed to be accessed to subdue methods that are damaging to the natural world and to people. The requirement to pursue methods even more in league with nature are pressing and comfort can be taken in the great advancement that is being made in this regard. The environment movement needs to press for progress in the context of agriculture that takes place at optimum scale, and resist the temptation to find the solution in processes that ignore the progress and contribution of modern agriculture. There are instances where small is better, there are instances when big is better; the key is executing at optimum scale.

Small Hydro Projects and the pursuit of aesthetics rather than environmental protection

In British Columbia we are blessed with a bounty of steep terrain and running water, a clean source of energy. There are several hundred sites suited to small hydro projects that could generate power with very small carbon foot prints. Yet one witnesses strong opposition to these projects at every turn. The source of this opposition is the rebuke of change as opposed to legitimate environmental concern. Person’s with an idealized view of nature take a preservationist view, like the essentialist of the past that saw the earth’s present state of evolution as a point of perfect stasis, as opposed to a changing environment. The creation of a small hydro project disrupts their inherited view of a given landscape, athletics are at play often in greater measure than environmental concern. As small hydro projects can be a source of natural enhancement, in addition to the environmental surplus generated by carbon free electric power generation. The out flow from the turbines can be directed over engineered spawning ground; a spawning ground that is designed specifically to suit fish populations can be created in conjunction with a small hydro project, a constant flow of well aerated water over the exact aggregate gravel in the volume most conducive to egg and hatched fish survival, can be a requirement of the design process. A circumstance BETTER and more productive than nature is ever likely to provide, a circumstance that is created as a by-product of human action. The power line location needs to be located to every degree possible in a manner that respects visual quality of the surrounding countryside; the power line can also provide a wildlife corridor to connect disparate populations.  So rather than throwing up their hands to stop human endeavour, the preservationists (as opposed to environmentalist) should demand the enhancement of nature as human endeavour transpires. In time, the sight of a small hydro project becomes a part of the landscape accepted as it is viewed through the new eyes of new passers by. Demand respect for nature, this is valid, but throwing up the hand at every project is tiresome and un-environmental. 

The volcano’s eruption may take the top of a mountain rendering it “ugly” to look at, only to deposit debris in a streams path to make a lake where nothing existed before. Is the lake created by this geophysical phenomenon a more valid addition to the “natural” landscape than a similar lake created by humanity; humanity being a product of nature. Anthropogenic change is viewed by the preservationists as being “unnatural” or environmentally invalid wholly on the basis that is has occurred by human initiative. Really the bigger question needs to be, is this action in accord with natural systems. An action may represent change but how does that change affect natural systems relative to the full expanse of the natural environment. Often myopia causes hysteric response to a given project, when all the natural attributes of the affected area are represented in good measure elsewhere. Worse, often the project is opposed, when relevant natural attributes of the site are really unaffected by the project; with opposition stemming from athletic concern rather than environmental concern. The only certainty in life is change, yet so many seek to stifle it or possess fear of it. The environment is an entity of change, perpetual eternal change. The embracing of this reality provides comfort to anthropological influence. Humans are capable of beauty and enhancement in the influence of the natural world and human endeavour can be directed in this manner.

The extreme elements of the environmental movement need to contemplate what their desired outcome is. There is a culture of contrariness within the movement that has the environmental movement opposing everything in contrast with a movement wanting to implement something. The preservationists elements tend to want to freeze nature in its present state of existence and were wherever possible reverse anthropological influence. One needs to question this position in the face of an expanded human population and expanding human capability to effect the environment at large. As an observer, I have a very difficult time getting a sense of were the environmental movement wants to take us, I can say however, when examining the path that much of their rhetoric directs us toward, they seem to favour the road to subsistence. If the environmental movement wants an outcome of abundance they need to begin forging solutions that seek abundance in the context of requirements of natural systems. Conservation is a laudable addition to the prudent use of resources and supports natural systems. By contrast athletically driven constraint of human enterprise, a common effect of environmental societal opposition, has very little to do with the health of the plant or human health.

As a person who has spent much time next to nature with a deep appreciation for her beauty, I possess an eagerness to save for my children the opportunity to commune with nature. The natural world offers for us, especially children, an expansive and often humbling place to learn our place in the world. When environmentalists seek to ensure this exists into the future, I am eager to support them. The challenge the extreme preservationists cause me is, they see the world in “us or nature terms” and view any anthropological affect on the environment as foreign and undesirable. When there is a small hydro dam in one location on a 100 mile long creek, there is still 99 miles of space to commune with nature. One can chose to view the small hydro site as a place of communion with nature, as small hydro represents the harmonious utilization natural processes. The objection to these types of development clearly resides in the rebuke to a changing landscape as opposed to concern for nature. This persistent constraint of human endeavour, absent of “real damage”, if accepted will take us all to a deprived place relative to our present existence. The question for the environmental movement is - what do you have in mind for us? 

The environmental movement by resisting development of the natural environment  is working to constrain the production of energy, which raises the price and forces us to consume less. This is a good thing when it encourages us to produce more with the same energy, making more productive use of resources. Where it becomes a bad thing, is when it stops the expansion of human endeavour and humanity stops the great march forward as faith in humanities ability to find congruency with nature is so eroded and people perceive harm in every anthropogenic change embarked upon. Society then becomes entwined in a thought process that moves us away from abundance and down the road to subsistence once again.  

Urban Perspective

Prior to expounding the virtues of nature, people need to spend a few days in the rain. People or the western world today live in isolation from almost everything they depend on for survival. The largest portion of our population live in urban settings of offices of optimum temperature and homes with thermostats set at comfort. Food is accessed in a similar manner, clean perfect environment no fuss no muss. Homes they live in and all that has gone into the construction of those homes, find little room in the psyche of people who’s life experience has generated a complacency that is absent even the most elementary concerns related to the matter. This populace is fertile ground for miss information, absent the witness of natures immense capacity to exist and create, having never really been exposed to nature absent a means of retreat to relative comfort, people can be convinced of nature’s fragility where in fact awesome power exists.       

Nature’s perfection constrained the minds of the essentialists in the past and a similar mode of thought is constraining us presently. The essentialist viewed nature as the perfect condition, unchanging from a point of origin. This view served to detract from their ability to observe the dynamic at play with nature and confounded their ability to respond to the natural world effectively. Similarly the environment movement now is contributing to a “perfection in stasis” view of nature, which is preventing progressive use of the natural world. Dialog from children and their keepers reveal the prevailing view that nature has wisdom. This is a dangerous ideal to allow exist, as nature is a series of events that occur on such a massive scale they are nearly outside perception. There are patterns that emerge as the multitude of existing things react to each other, in the same way a river finds patterns in response to the various geophysical influences. The water and the physical world react to each other to trigger events, neither the water nor the physical world hold wisdom. This seems blatantly oblivious, yet the idealist view of a wise nature is prominent and is gaining more prominence as people propagate this distorting doctrine.

The inclination to revert to an angelic past where the world was harmonious and humans existed as one with nature resides deeply in the culture of many in the preservationist wings of the environmental movement. The point that needs to be made sharply is, the angelic past is absent in history. Human existence is better now than it has ever been because of our mastery of our environment, and nature has changed, as it always has and always will. While seeking action in compliance with nature, humans should seek to expand their lot to become even more the master of their environment.

Sustainability and the power of apocalyptic thinking.

Sustainability is the most prevalent word in contemporary lexicon related to the environment. There are times when we can actually measure sustainability, in the case of harvesting a forest we can calculate, based on historical data, the rate of growth a given forest type and then harvest at a rate within that rate of growth to achieve a “sustainable” circumstance. Often the world is used in broad terms however, “the way we are using the earth is unsustainable”, like somehow the world is ending – it is all running out. This brings a whole new level of dread to the human psyche, a narrative is developing that says that, by our very existence we are contributing to our own end. This is bringing about a drive to acetic existence; unless we cease the utilization of all the comforts our mastery of our environment has provided, we are contributing to our end. To model the sum total of human endeavour is certainly outside the ability of any mortal, to model the universe and its limitations or potentiality, is most certainly outside the ability of any mortal. So why has the assertion that, what we are doing on earth is unsustainable, considered valid? An every bit as valid assertion is that the earth is a robust environment of massive resource able to provide human’s with an abundant life. Why are we hampering our society with a psychological hobble of unsubstantiated limit, when there is a track record now of a steady upward trend in human existence with nature functioning and providing.

Sustainability is really a moving target, the land base required to support a hunter gather population is far greater than a land base required to support a comparable population with agriculture. The determining factor in this regard is technology as it relates to effectively harnessing natural systems. It is important to note, if human population had stayed constant at any point in time, modern agriculture technology would facilitate utilization of smaller and smaller portion of the earth’s surface for sustenance. Modern technology is a friend to the environment by increasing the productive intensity of every given acre under cultivation. Granted the collective effect of technology in general has facilitated more people to feed, that fails to diminish the fact that technology severs to satisfy human requirements in the context of the environment at large. To date technology has always addressed sustainability by providing humans with more effective ways to utilize natural systems. If at any point in time this ceases to be the case, then the massive forces of nature will dictate the outcomes, then maybe the preservationists will have their way and the Anthropine will be over.

Much of what feeds the human psyche is the realization of our end. We accept that at the moment we’re born a process is started that will result in dieing. We know this to be fact. This reality resides in an almost denied manner within us and finds expression is every step we take. The perverse attraction to apocalyptic narrative comes form the resignation, collectively as humans, to our own end, apocalyptic believe is massively rational to humans because it is so deeply rooted in stark fact. The devastating end being so deeply enshrined in the human mind and allows devastating projections find sympathy with humans and is a powerful influence over us. This reality provides a rational basis for irrational belief, feeding the willingness of people to accept the dire predictions of doom that flow from the influencers of the world. This “negative ad campaign” that is assaulting our way of life is having negative affect and needs to be countered; countered by enlisting dread as a companion to the positive message of abundance. We can fill whatever collective prophesy we choose to propagate, propagate the apocalypse and you may get it, believe as I do in mother earth’s abundance and it will be provided.

Environment and the connection human enterprise

While most agree aggressive action is warranted in improving how we utilized resources that affect the carbon content of the air, the market has started to that for us. Until about 20 years ago, there was an almost perfect correlation between US GDP and energy consumption, when plotted on a graph the lines move in unison. Then something happen, the US economy started becoming an economy of intellectual endeavour and technologies came into play the made human action less energy intensive and that correlation has now broken. GDP is now consistently trending upward and away from energy consumption. This demonstrates that the monetary system is an abstract representation of human endeavour as human interact with their environment, there is a tendency for this abstract entity to also reflect the needs of nature. Is this perfect, no, are there market driven Faustian events, yes. With very little tweaking however, the monetary entity can be evolved to provide incentive for harmonising human action with natural systems. This requires good policy, policy that accelerates human action in accord with nature and expands human prosperity,

As a Canadian I witnessed the collapse of the cod fishery off our east coast. Successive governments engaged in policies that exacerbated the faustian effects of extraction of value from common property. The Canadian Government failed by falling prey to political pressure to save a way of life, as opposed to rational management of a resource. In a circumstance where the market determined viability of the Cod fishery over fishing could occur, and as the fish stocks depleted so would the fishermen, in much the same way a natural predator responds to depletion in prey, erroneously referred to as the “balance of nature”. In an act of complete perversion the Canadian government instituted a “fishing for stamps” program which allowed fishermen to collect unemployment insurance payments for only a very short period of work. This act extended the economic viability of fishing a depleted resource and provided incentive to fish to the point of the decimation of the cod fishery.

This demonstrates a queer dynamic of values colliding to create disaster. In western society we have a thing called the work ethic, which states that the only valid way to garner sustenance is by work, and if not fully engaged work then at least a token effort. So the government said to the fishermen, if you work a little bit, we will extend you financial benefits for sustenance. So instead of pursuing another means of livelihood in a viable industry, they continued to fish Cod. The government would have be better off pay them to stop fishing, purchase their assets and pay them out, a Cod fishermen’s golden parachute if you will. The next value was the preservation of a way of life and the support of communities. This value contributed to the “fish for stamps” program and many other programs geared toward extending the viability of Cod fishing, where the Cod were disappearing. So in an effort to save communities, the government contributed to a circumstance where the traditional rational for that communities existence is more severely curtailed that if “nature had taken its course”. The value of environmental protection found expression in fishing limits and other management efforts to preserve the fishery’s viability, whatever the methods employed; the outcome indicates the effectiveness the government’s ability to manage a resource. The Canadian Cod fishery’s destruction was a tragedy of the commons in the traditional sense and in an expanded sense; as common concern trumped rational action.    

If nothing else, the overall dynamic around the destruction of the Canadian Cod fishery demonstrates how poor a bedfellow “social activism” makes to environmentalism.  The feeble attempts at placating social concern severed to generate a circumstance were both the environmental concern and the social concerns were both ill served. In the case of the Cod fishery, the outcome would likely have been better absent government intervention as financial imperatives would have resulted in lower fishing participation.   

The scarcity doctrine lingered in the background as fishermen believed the world held little else for them and government held an impoverished view of fishermen’s ability to adapt. I would wager that had government adopted a view of abundance and provided generous mitigation to the fishermen subjected to their management, the entity called the Government of Canada would have been better off now, because they would once again be enjoying the benefit of a reinvigorated fishery.

Strengthening the ties between carbon and the economy

We need only to strengthen the ties mildly, between the abstract representation of human endeavour (the monetary system) and the environment to gain alignment between human action and natural systems. We have successfully globalized the monetary system in a manner that permits efficient international interaction; we need now to imbue that system with a connection to the natural world. The key is full and equitable participation.

To date efforts in linking the economy and the environment have been curtailing participation by creating a circumstance where major emitters are deterred by structural disadvantage in proposed solutions. Had the world approached Kyoto purely on the basis of environmental concern, Kyoto would have had a greater chance of acceptance. Proponents however, choose to engage in redistribution by placing the majority of the burden on first world countries and relinquishing responsibility from other countries. The Cap and Trade proposals were as much a redistribution program as an environmental program. Their justification for this approach was that the first world countries had created most of the problem so they should pay the biggest penalty, the underpinning was a social justice imperative of the “rich should pay”; this may sound fair but political realities drove the refusal of major players. This is an example where the social justice movement scuttled environmental progress. We can learn from the past, but only the future matters, and asking people to accept disadvantage in the future is sure to meet strong residence. Placing a price on carbon is an effective means to link the economy to the environment; the key is its universal application.

The Kyoto protocol was a starting point in the process of creating a world wide link of the economy with the environment, the creation and negotiations of the cap and trade program needed to take place at the world trade organisation, perhaps as an extension of the Doha trade talks. While this would bring another level of complexity to the Doha process, it would be the best place for Cap and Trade to be developed, as Cap and Trade development would have taken place in the context of the multitude of other considerations in the development of a world trading system. The WTO is keenly aware of the asymmetry of prosperity and the influences it has in generating a world trading system, as such their expertise provides the greatest opportunity for the successful development of a cap and trade system.       

The flow of capital can provide some illumination as to the possibilities for the effective connection between the environment and the economy. The international clearing bank effectively manages the most complex transfer of funds to and from countries in an almost instantaneous fashion. The financial system is a complex entity and yet there is an international organisation that provides for the flow of capital in and instantaneously anywhere in the world. The emergence of this organisation happened because people prosper as a result of its creation and operation. A similar mechanism can function to facilitate as seamless a circumstance for cap and trade and other programs; the key though is universal benefit.   

There are many examples of existing organisations that can provide a conduit for the strengthening of the connection of the financial and real economies with natural systems, fostering universal attachment in the context of pursuing prosperity. Yet the environmental movement, I believe under the influence of social activist interlopers, have chosen to demonise these promising institutions. Rather than seeing an existing functioning entity with capabilities that satisfy green causes, they have chosen instead to reinvent the wheel absent considering the functionality these organisations represent.

One Man’s Wish

To imagine a world of harmony between man and nature may have been beyond the possible just a half century ago, but now with the world’s knowledge doubling every few months and the world’s people able to speak to one another with such ease, I am hopeful. Beyond human knowledge and ability, lies something stronger, human spirit. The most heartening thing I witness now is the spirit and strength of will that finds expression in our youth. They are conservationists who know and expect a good life; this fusion of ethic and expected experience will guide them to take us closer to the harmony we all wish for.

It is my sincere hope, that a few words on a page can give young people insight into the prosperity we enjoy in the first world, its source being the freedom we have to pursue prosperity through largely unfettered enterprise. Also that they are wary of people who detract from that source of prosperity, the market place in concert with natural systems in the absence of distorting policy will surely bring us closer to harmony with natural systems, than the social engineers who have embedded themselves in the environmental movement – be wary of those clad in green cloaks covering their exuberant red cloths, people whispering promises of social justice through equality, they’ve had their chance and it failed many in the process. In the presence of abundance humans become most rational, kind and generous. Prosperity is the best guarantee for a safer and healthier world and a much better offering to the world's needy than the most hideous proposition of subsistence. Trade at its apex of execution will eradicate the prosperity asymmetry that now grips our world, time and a mindful eye to our lot is all that’s needed. Enterprise linked to the natural world will build an economy prosperous and in harmony with nature.