[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Re: the bogus "May 25 Black Day for the Environment"



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from "Dusty Myers" <dustymec@voyager.net>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

You're right - racism isn't the best umbrella term. Fascism is a much better
one, and while racism and fascism have been used interchangeably, it's
important to remember that Italy was fascist without being racist.



Fascism comes from a gut feeling. It denies rationality. Obviously, Hitler
capitalized on gut feelings quite well. What escapes me is how Malthusian
obsessions with population growth are maintained in light of a tremendous
amount of research showing how resource distribution is a much bigger
problem facing humanity. The argument for limiting immigration comes from
the lifeboat effect - the feeling that the ship is going down, so the best
thing to do is hoard as much as possible. If that doesn't come from the gut
then tell me what does? Why not redistribute resources? That seems much more
rational in my mind.



High rates of consumption is not a given. It doesn't derive from our genes.
To make this link is to support social Darwinism, which does bring the race
card back into play. One only has to read the Bell Curve to know that the
survival of the fittest is alive and well.



Dusty Myers

Lansing, MI




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Kuhlman" <rokuhlman@yahoo.com>
To: "enviro Mich" <enviro-mich@great-lakes.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: E-M:/ Re: the bogus "May 25 Black Day for the Environment"


> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enviro-Mich message from Roger Kuhlman <rokuhlman@yahoo.com>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I need to point out that a little less than one half
> of each American's lifestyle is gained at the expense
> of other nation's environments and habitats. Americans
> are not living exclusively off their own country's
> resources. If it was, Americans would be so much less
> wealthy. America lives very confortably and
> excessively because it exploits the rest of the world.
>
> People have been promising major new technological
> advances to solve our environmental problems for
> decades now. They won't come true unless we limit our
> population growth and reduce our consumption of
> natural resources and habitats. There are no signs
> that this process is even starting.
>
> Roger Kuhlman
> Ann Arbor, Michigan
>
>
> --- David Holtz <dholtz@cleanwater.org> wrote:
>
> > The points made against immigration are not
> > necessarily made by bad
> > people who have contempt for immigrants or poor
> > people. But it can
> > certainly sound that way, and the anti-immigration
> > crowd is unconvincing
> > (at least to me) when making the case that the net
> > effect of immigration
> > to the U.S. is increased environmental degradation
> > on a global scale.
> > While the United States has a long way to go it is,
> > arguably, at least
> > as environmentally protective as source countries
> > for immigration to the
> > U.S.  The environmental footprint of an American may
> > be greater in terms
> > of output as a result of affluence, but is it the
> > argument of the
> > anti-immigration crowd that the solution is to keep
> > poor people poor?
> >
> > I would argue that with technological advances, it
> > is possible for
> > populations to grow, live decently and not destroy
> > the planet.
> > Moreover, it is the more affluent societies where
> > family planning takes
> > root.  That is why despite immigration, growth rates
> > in the United
> > States are more stable than in less affluent
> > countries.
> >
> > Rather that rip each other apart over immigration, I
> > would rather see
> > environmentalists focus on improving economic
> > conditions for all the
> > world's peoples. That won't happen if
> > environmentalists, acting out of
> > fear, find themselves in spiritual kinship with an
> > ugly right-wing
> > political faction whose crusade against foreigners
> > seems only to have
> > surfaced with such passion as immigrants became more
> > brown, yellow, or
> > black than Irish, Lituanian, German or English.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kim Hunter wrote:
> >
> > > Gilbert is right on many counts.  I was actually
> > hoping that by
> > > ignoring the rather amazing argument that Kuhlman
> > puts forward that it
> > > would fade.  It is illogical and absurd to fault
> > immigrants for taking
> > > on what the decadent US life style, while ignoring
> > the lifestyle itself.
> > >
> > > But I am afraid we are in for yet another round of
> > Kuhlman telling us
> > > we can do nothing about the root of problem of a
> > wasteful lifestyle so
> > > we have to stop people from coming here, even
> > though those folks life
> > > far lower on the socio-economic chain.  Once you
> > realize how bad that
> > > argument is you can only begin speculating what is
> > behind it.  That's
> > > when the outrage sets in.
> > >
> > > Kim Hunter
> > >
> > > */Reg Gilbert <reg@glu.org>/* wrote:
> > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >     Enviro-Mich message from Reg Gilbert
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >     Dear list,
> > >
> > >     This message from Mr. Kuhlman is an outrage.
> > >
> > >     In the first and most important sense, this
> > message dresses an old
> > >     American fear of multiplying non-white people
> > in environmental
> > >     clothes. The tone of the message makes this
> > clear. I hope others on
> > >     this list will denounce this sentiment for the
> > xenophobia that it
> > >     almost certainly is, but in any case certainly
> > feeds.
> > >
> > >     Secondly, Mr. Kuhlman's environmental logic is
> > fallacious. Any
> > >     increase in population growth in the United
> > States caused by
> > >     immigration from Mexico and Central America
> > will be much more than
> > >     offset by reduced population growth in the
> > source countries. It is
> > >     demographically axiomatic that increased
> > living standards reduce
> > >     birth rates. Perhaps Mr. Kuhlman does not
> > consider population growth
> > >     south of the border as problematic as
> > population growth in the United
> > >     States. In fact, it is more significant in its
> > contribution to total
> > >     human misery and long-term potential for
> > international
> > >     destabilization and war.
> > >
> > >     Mr. Kuhlman's concern for immigration
> > contributing to "extravagant
> > >     levels of consumption" is of course
> > generically valid, but I say
> > >     terribly inappropriate in this context --
> > should environmentalists
> > >     really argue that low-income nations and the
> > people in them should
> > >     not aspire to improving their standards of
> > living? Substantial
> > >     portions of immigrant earnings go back to home
> > countries to support
> > >     the most basic family needs. Mexicans and El
> > Salvadorans do not come
> > >     to the United States to indulge in extravagant
> > living.
> > >
> > >     This message is not intended to support the
> > Senate bill per se,
> > >     though I would be surprised if anybody on this
> > list, perhaps with the
> > >     exception of Mr. Kuhlman, thought it was
> > morally acceptable to have a
> > >     permanent system in which more than ten
> > million people needed for
> > >     jobs in United States, whether illegal
> > immigrant or legal "guest
> > >     worker," have no path to citizenship or the
> > vote. The immigrant
> > >     debate is at least in part a civil rights
> > debate.
> > >
> > >     But whatever one's position in the immigration
> > debate, I say it would
> > >     be politically and morally wise to keep the
> > environment out of it.
> > >
> > >     Reg
> > >
> > >
> > >     At 11:57 AM 5/26/2006, Roger Kuhlman wrote:
> > >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >     >Enviro-Mich message from Roger Kuhlman
> > >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >     >
> > >     >On May 25, the US Senate blithely voted 62 to
> > 36 to
> > >     >add upwards of 100 million foreign immigrants
> > to the
> > >     >American population over the next 20 years in
> > a
> > >     >so-called immigration reform bill. Just like
> > 1986,
> > >     >this bill grants amnesty to illegal
> > immigrants but
> > >     >instead of three million illegal aliens
> > getting
> > >     >amnesty as in 1986, the number today could go
> > as high
> > >     >as 20 million. Whatever the actual number
> > turns out to
> > >     >be, amnesty for today's illegal aliens will
> > be a huge
> > >     >inducement for future illegal immigration.
> > There will
> > >     >be no surprise in 10 years when our country
> > has
> > >     >another new 20 or 30 million illegal
> > immigrants
> > >     >clamoring for amnesty again.
> > >     >
> > >     >The environment and American Environmentalism
> > has
> > >     >suffered a major defeat in this Senate
> > action. If you
> > >     >have high economic growth, extravagant levels
> > of
> > >     >consumption, and a rapidly growing population
> > as we
> > >     >have in America today, what chance do you
> > have
> > >     >stopping or even slowing major environmental
> > >     >degradation in both America proper and the
> > world
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ==============================================================
> ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
> and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
> http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
>
> Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
> majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info
enviro-mich"
> ==============================================================
>
>



==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================