Light Up 'Earth Hour'

March 24, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (14)

One of the great intellectual conflicts of the early part of the 21st century concerns the role of man here on planet Earth. Some, like the followers of Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich--author of The Population Bomb--hold that mankind’s role boils down to that of exploiter of the Earth’s resources and despoiler of its natural beauty.

This view, widely accepted in western political, cultural, and academic circles, is most commonly expressed by the so-called environmental movement in proposals that are antitechnology, antiprogress and, if fully implemented, will lead to a reduced standard of living in the developed world.

It is an antihuman, antihumanist view, one that decries human achievement rather than celebrating it. And those who believe this way are once again calling on people to turn off their lights in observance of “Earth Hour” on March 26. [Read the U.S. News debate: Does the United States need more nuclear power?]

It’s a once a year event, one the so-called environmental community regards as a symbolic act urging businesses, individuals and lawmakers to take action in support of efforts to combat global warming, err, climate change.

The proponents of “Earth Hour,” the Competitive Enterprise Institute says, want “laws and sanctions to prevent individuals from freely using earth’s resources.” But, because the folks at CEI believe human progress and technological innovation have made life better, they are encouraging everyone to mark March 26 as “Human Achievement Hour.”

“The result of the environmental movement is a limitation on our ability to create the future wave of technologies and a hindrance on our ability to produce the current products that benefit or everyday lives.”

“You can sit in the dark and join them or you can join people around the world who plan to leave their lights on, affirming their appreciation for human inventions like electricity, indoor plumbing, mass food production, heat, transportation, and computers,” CEI says, asking people to--through their actions--cast a vote “against environmental alarmism” and in favor of “human achievement.” [See a slide show of 10 cities adopting smart grid technology.]

They have a point. The Luddite, backwards thinking that portrays technology as evil has firmly taken root in western culture. In doing so it ignores the ways in which it has led to an improvement in global living standards, healthier people, better resource utilization and longer lives. To simply say the technology is bad, which is the implicit premise behind such crusades as the one to combat so-called global warming--remember it was former Vice President Al Gore who called the development of the internal combustion engine the worst thing to ever happen to mankind--is to doom all of mankind to an eventual return to the state of nature where, as Thomas Hobbes wrote, all life is “nasty, brutish and short.”

Tags:
Al Gore,
energy policy and climate change,
environment

Reader Comments Read all comments (14)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I dont need a healthy balance with nature and dont wanna grow my food locally. I go to the grocery store for my food and I eat meat and dont care if it comes from across the world. Thats what trucks are for!! Delivering good!!! That Dr whomever he is well he is full of it like i said before the environment is fine and I am not changing ANY of my habits for the environment

Terry of GA 7:51PM March 29, 2011

Earth Hour is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of anyways. I am not shutting off my lights or power for an hour. The Global warming and environmental problems are made up by the government to try and screw us it has been proven that Global warming is not real. I will continue living my life the way I am now.... Driving my gas powered car and running my electricity as I want to. Sorry but its true none of the global stuff is real their may be some pollution but its liveable and isnt causing a global crisis.

Terry of GA 7:47PM March 29, 2011

I agree with Professor Erhlich that humans havbe overreached the carrying capacity of the earth. One only has to track the specie extinction rates and sees a J curve mirrors the human increase. Our numbers are largely due to two things, hygiene and massive increase in energy use, namely for agriculture.

A movement of Permaculture is a way to design households and communities to live within a balance of nature, which we are a part of, growing ones food locally and other needs. This is part of the solution.

I listened to Dr Erhlich on a radio program, he advised the reduction of humans to around 2 billion, if I remember correctly, the number my mother was born with in around 1922. I was born in 1958 and it was @3, in some 50 years we doubled that to close to 7! Some say it will reach 9 and level off, we'll see.

Michael Jones of MA 7:03PM March 27, 2011

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement