It appears that the progressive socialist democrats, also known as the neo-communists, are trying to convince mankind that there is a group of superior, enlightened beings on Earth that should be given perpetual power over all rather unexceptional population units (people) to preserve the integrity of the planet and to conserve resources for future generations. Unfortunately, there are factors that illustrate their moral and intellectual bankruptcy.
One, we have seen the historical abuse of concentrated power at the top of societal organizations and in the case of idealists, academics, socialists, and communists, it has led to the death and misery of millions of people. That the truism “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” has never been truer. The first objective of those in power is to perpetuate and extend their power – mandating every increasing punishments for every deviation – that leads to a police state and the loss of all unalienable rights. The only outcome is a bloody revolution that may or may not succeed; sometimes resulting in the installation of an even greater dictator. Illustrated by the darlings of the left: Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Under this toxic and malignant ideology, individualism must be destroyed in favor of the collective. Where groupthink leads to compounding and cascading disasters.
Two, the progressive socialist democrats accrete power by creating real or artificial scarcities which they then purport to manage on behalf of the collective. They dole out power, perks, privileges, and power to those who assist them in gaining and maintaining power. Thus political corruption is institutionalized and given the protection of the law. Where judges and juries are the ideological enforcers of the political system regardless of truth, justice, or even logic. One need only look at the ideologically-corrupted Supreme Court to see that nine people (now eight) have usurped the sole law-making provision of Congress and the administrative duties of the Executive Branch to become a law unto themselves. Where they are mandated to rule on the constitutionality of existing law, resulting in upholding previous court decisions or returning them to a lower court for further action or allowing Congress to redress the grievance, they set up “bright line” tests and guidelines that become de facto law used to judge citizens who had zero input into the decision-making process. The progressive socialist democrats have created such a mass of confusing, conflicting, and downright illogical laws, that they have effectively criminalized all of human behavior – a weapon that can be selectively at will to maintain the rulers power base against rivals.
Three, the idea that man can affect the dynamics of the planet and overcome nature’s inherent rules is demonstrably and patently absurd. And ever since the socialists and communists have infiltrated the environmental movement to gain funding and political power, it has been a push for universal governance based on the management of resources. Managing healthcare to control individuals and managing energy to control economies. This perversion of science has led to the death and suffering of millions. One need only look at the progressive’s campaign against the chemical DDT which was used to eradicate and control disease-bearing mosquitos to see that the political corruption of science crated a man-made catastrophe that is even greater than the Holocaust and the actions of socialist and communist dictators.
So now we come to a new book review that is not only morally and intellectually bankrupt, but represents all that is bad with corrupt ideologies and educational charlatans … [My comments in bracketed blue italics.]
The Conservative Belief in Human Supremacy Is Destroying Our Planet -- Human supremacism is morally indefensible.
By Derrick Jensen / Seven Stories Press
The following is an excerpt from the new book The Myth of Human Supremacy by Derrick Jensen (Seven Stories Press, 2016):
I’m sitting by a pond, in sunlight that has the slant and color of early fall. Wind blows through the tops of second-growth redwood, cedar, fir, alder, willow. Breezes make their way down to sedges, rushes, grasses, who nod their heads this way and that. Spider silk glistens. A dragonfly floats a few inches above the water, then suddenly climbs to perch atop a rush.
A family of jays talks among themselves.
I smell the unmistakable, slightly sharp scent of redwood duff, and then smell also the equally unmistakable and also slightly sharp, though entirely different, smell of my own animal body.
A small songbird, I don’t know who, hops on two legs just above the waterline. She stops, cocks her head, then pecks at the ground.
Movement catches my eye, and I see a twig of redwood needles fall gently to the ground. It helped the tree. Now it will help the soil.
Someday I am going to die. Someday so are you. Someday both you and I will feed—even more than we do now, through our sloughed skin, through our excretions, through other means—those communities who now feed us. And right now, amidst all this beauty, all this life, all these others—sedge, willow, dragonfly, redwood, spider, soil, water, sky, wind, clouds—it seems not only ungenerous, but ungrateful to begrudge the present and future gift of my own life to these others without whom neither I nor this place would be who we are, without whom neither I nor this place would even be.
Likewise, in this most beautiful place on Earth—and you do know, don’t you, that each wild and living place on Earth is the most beautiful place on Earth—I can never understand how members of the dominant culture could destroy life on this planet. I can never understand how they could destroy even one place.
Last year someone from Nature [sic] online journal interviewed me by phone. I include the sic because the journal has far more to do with promoting human supremacism—the belief that humans are separate from and superior to everyone else on the planet—than it has to do with the real world.
Here is one of the interviewer’s “questions”: “Surely nature can only be appreciated by humans. If nature were to cease to exist, nature itself would not notice, as it is not conscious (at least in the case of most animals and plants, with the possible exception of the great apes and cetaceans) and, other than through life’s drive for homeostasis, is indifferent to its own existence. Nature thus only achieves worth through our consciously valuing it.”
At the precise moment he said this to me, I was watching through my window a mother bear lying on her back in the tall grass, her two children playing on her belly, the three of them clearly enjoying each other and the grass and the sunshine. I responded, “How dare you say these others do not appreciate life!” He insisted they don’t.
I asked him if he knew any bears personally. He thought the question absurd.
This is why the world is being murdered.
[Murder? The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another? Perhaps the lack of precision with which the author chooses and uses his words is symptomatic and expressive of his beliefs. The author has made a unjustified leap of logic and has just anthropomorphized the entire world. The world is an ecosystem that is governed mostly by nature’s rules and man’s impact on the planet is both local and transitory. Whether or not man will really have the power to destroy the planet is questionable. But, man does have the power to destroy the species, our own included. Perhaps why unchecked viral experiments are so dangerous – especially in these politically corrupt times when science has been corrupted by activism and the weaponization of its findings to convey an advantage to a particular political entity.
Unquestioned beliefs are the real authorities of any culture. A central unquestioned belief of this culture is that humans are superior to and separate from everyone else. Human supremacism is part of the foundation of much of this culture’s religion, science, economics, philosophy, art, epistemology, and so on.
Human supremacism is killing the planet. Human supremacists—at this point, almost everyone in this culture—have shown time and again that the maintenance of their belief in their own superiority, and the entitlement that springs from this belief, are more important to them than the well-being or existences of everyone else. Indeed, they’ve shown that the maintenance of this self-perception and entitlement are more important than the continuation of life on the planet.
Until this supremacism is questioned and dismantled, the self-perceived entitlement that flows from this supremacism guarantees that every attempt to stop this culture from killing the planet will fail, in great measure because these attempts will be informed and limited by this supremacism, and thus will at best be ways to slightly mitigate harm, with the primary point being to make certain to never in any way question or otherwise endanger the supremacism or entitlement.
In short, people protect what’s important to them, and human supremacists have shown time and again that their sense of superiority and the tangible benefits they receive because of their refusal to perceive others as anything other than inferiors or resources to be exploited is more important to them than not destroying the capacity of this planet to support life, including, ironically, their own.
Especially because human supremacism is killing the planet, but also on its own terms, human supremacism is morally indefensible. It is also intellectually indefensible. Neither of which seems to stop a lot of people from trying to defend it.
The first line of defense of human supremacism is no defense at all, literally. This is true for most forms of supremacism, as unquestioned assumptions form the most common base for any form of bigotry: Of course humans (men, whites, the civilized) are superior, why do you ask? Or more precisely: How could you possibly ask? Or even more precisely: What the hell are you talking about, you crazy person? Or more precisely yet, an awkward silence while everyone politely forgets you said anything at all.
Think about it: if you were on a bus or in a shopping mall or in a church or in the halls of Congress, and you asked the people around you if they think humans are more intelligent than or are otherwise superior to cows or willows or rivers or mushrooms or stones (“stupid as a box of rocks”), what do you think people would answer? If you said to them that trees told you they don’t want to be cut down and made into 2x4s, what would happen to your credibility? Contrast that with the credibility given to those who state publicly that you can have infinite economic (or human population) growth on a finite planet, or who argue that the world consists of resources to be exploited. If you said to people in this culture that oceans don’t want to be murdered, would these humans listen? If you said that prairie dogs are in no way inferior to (or less intelligent than) humans, and you said this specifically to those humans who have passed laws requiring landowners to kill prairie dogs, would they be more likely to laugh at you or agree with you? Or do you think they’d be more likely to get mad at you? And just think how mad they’d get if you told them that land doesn’t want to be owned (most especially by them). If you told them there was a choice between electricity from dams and the continued existence of salmon, lampreys, sturgeon, and mussels, which would they choose? Why? What are they already choosing?
This is too abstract. Here is human supremacism. Right now in Africa, humans are placing cyanide wastes from gold mines on salt licks and in ponds. This cyanide poisons all who come there, from elephants to lions to hyenas to the vultures who eat the dead. The humans do this in part to dump the mine wastes, but mainly so they can sell the ivory from the murdered elephants.
Right now a human is wrapping endangered ploughshares tortoises in cellophane and cramming them into roller bags to try to smuggle them out of Madagascar and into Asia for the pet trade. There are fewer than 400 of these tortoises left in the wild.
Right now in China, humans keep bears in tiny cages, iron vests around the bears’ abdomens to facilitate the extraction of bile from the bears’ gall bladders. The bears are painfully “milked” daily. The vests also serve to keep the bears from killing themselves by punching themselves in the chest.
Right now there are fewer than 500 Amani flatwing damselflies left in the world. They live along one stream in Tanzania. The rest of their home has been destroyed by human agriculture.
This year has seen a complete collapse of monarch butterfly populations in the United States and Canada. Their homes have been destroyed by agriculture.
Right now humans are plowing under and poisoning prairies. Right now humans are clearcutting forests. Right now humans are erecting mega-dams. Right now because of dams, 25 percent of all rivers no longer reach the ocean.
And most humans couldn’t care less.
Right now the University of Michigan Wolverines football team is hosting the Minnesota Golden Gophers. More than 100,000 humans are attending this football game. More than 100,000 humans have attended every Michigan home football game since 1975. There used to be real wolverines in Michigan. One was sighted there in 2004, the first time in 200 years. That wolverine died in 2010.
More people in Michigan—“The Wolverine State”—care about the Michigan Wolverines football team than care about real wolverines.
This is human supremacism.
I just got a note from a friend who was visiting her son. She writes, “Yesterday morning when I emptied the compost bucket, the guy next door called out to ask if that was ‘garbage’ I was putting on the pile. I told him it was ‘compost.’ We went back and forth a couple of times. Then he said, ‘We don’t want no [sic] animals around here. I saw a raccoon out there. There were never any animals around here before.’
What better statement of human supremacism?”
Recently, scientists discovered that some species of mice love to sing. They “fill the air with trills so high-pitched that most humans can’t even hear them.” If “the melody is sweet enough, at least to the ears of a female mouse, the vocalist soon finds himself with a companion.”
Mice, like songbirds, have to be taught how to sing. This is culture, passed from generation to generation. If they aren’t taught, they can’t sing.
So, what is the response by scientists to these mice, who love to sing, who teach each other how to sing, who sing for their lovers, who have been compared to “opera singers”?
Given what the ideology of human supremacism does to people who otherwise seem sane, we shouldn’t be surprised to learn that the scientists wanted to find out what would happen if they surgically deafened these mice. And we shouldn’t be surprised to learn that the mice could no longer sing their operas, their love songs. The deafened mice could no longer sing at all. Instead, they screamed.
And who could blame them? This is human supremacism.
Or there’s this. I just saw a snuff video of scientists pouring molten aluminum into an anthill to reveal the shape of the tunnels. Then the scientists marveled at the beauty of the shape of the anthill they just massacred to the last ant.
This is human supremacism.
Or there’s this. The air around the world has recently been declared to be as carcinogenic as secondhand smoke. The leading cause of lung cancer is now industrial pollution.
This is human supremacism.
Derrick Jensen is an author and environmental activist. His latest book is The Myth of Human Supremacy (Seven Stories Press, 2016).
About the author Derrick Jensen …
This is not the first time I have encountered a well-credentialed (Colorado School of Mines: Mineral Engineering Physics) radical activist author with extremist views. It appears that Jensen’s viewpoint is extreme, at the very least, as he believes that society should confer “personhood” (legal-babble to provide human-like rights under the law) on plants and animals.
Derrick Jensen is primarily an advocate for indigenous peoples and wild nature, and an opponent of civilization, rejecting the notion that it can ever be an ethical or sustainable model for human society.
His discourse often, thus, explores the psychopathology of the entire modern society towards a conclusion that civilization and its global, industrial economy is fundamentally at odds with and obliterating healthy relationships, the natural environment (including numerous forms of life and their habitats), and indigenous ways of life.
An outspoken critic of human supremacy, Jensen adheres to a form of non-anthropocentrism: perhaps, ultimately, ecocentrism. First, his ethics advocates for humans to actively support the flourishing of entire natural communities and their many individual species, rather than the flourishing of humans alone. Second, his ethics extends the status of personhood to all organisms and ecosystems, particularly including non-human animals and plants.
Accordingly, he urgently exhorts readers and audiences to help bring an end to industrial civilization, promoting its dismantling by any means necessary, thus challenging pacifism, since he believes that violence may be justified at times, particularly as a form of self-defense or resistance against oppression. <Source>
Bottom line …
Only time will tell whether or not Jensen and/or his followers may turn violent and become violent radicals like Ted Kaczynski (UNABOMBER). Kaczynski, a uber-smart math prodigy, engaged in a “nationwide bombing campaign against people involved with modern technology.
Why the far left media continues to give widespread attention to this type of philosophy says more about creating anarchy, confusion, and chaos in order to bring about their revolutionary utopia than it says bout preserving and protecting the environment.
We are so screwed.
“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell