MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Ecology’

How The Grinch Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 2, 2021

“Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg, Spotlight.org

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/01/l-reichard-white/how-the-grinch-flunked-ecology-and-stole-the-whole-damn-year/

By L. Reichard White

OK, I’m going to give away this whole piece with the first quotes. Can you figure out where I’m going with ’em – – –

Athens distributed its most responsible public positions by lottery: army generalships, water supply, everything. …Professionals existed but did not make key decisions; they were only technicians, never well regarded because prevailing opinion held that technicians had enslaved their own minds. –The Way It Used To Be by John Taylor Gatto

Some First Nation folks have a related outlook which clarifies things – – –

My own tradition disbelieves in “experts.” “That which enables, disables also” means that a physicist will fail in understanding in many other areas, precisely because of the amount of time she/he spends on physics and therefore not on other things. Such people are not considered “experts,” but “those extensively informed on part of the whole“. –A NATIVE AMERICAN WORLDVIEW, by Paula Underwood Spencer

“…everything is too important ever to be entrusted to professional experts, because every organization of such professionals and every established social organization becomes a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve.” –Carroll Quigley, ex-president William Jefferson Clinton’s mentor

Here’s the typical reaction when an “organization of such professionals” is challenged – – –

“I’d lie. We have to survive after-all.” –my childhood friend just before an internal evaluation to determine if the organization he headed actually was reducing the prison recidivism rate. He didn’t have to lie.

Particularly note Paula Underwood Spencer’s sentence, “Such people are not considered ‘experts,’ but ‘those extensively informed on part of the whole‘.”

Maybe that use of the word “whole” reminds you of ecology? Not yet? Well I’m pretty sure it will – – –

When Dr. Fauci and I were growing up — he’s five years older — our pale-face cultures — and even science — were a lot more narrow-minded, restricted and boxed-in, mostly because of a few language quirks and associated habits of thought.

Then along came General Semantics, operations research which morphed into systems analysis, and finally, in the 1960s, the environmental movement which popularized ecology.

They all helped us see through the barriers, walls and borders we inadvertantly impose on reality because of those quirks of language and habits of thought. They helped us see the Bigger Picture, and of course, that there always is one.

Another view sees system analysis as a problem-solving technique that breaks down a system into its component pieces for the purpose of studying how well those component parts work and interact to accomplish their purpose.[1… Systems analysis – Wikipedia

Systems analysis showed us we were always drawing lines — mental and otherwise — around parts of things, and thus, as per Paula Underwood Spencer, dividing the whole up into parts. That schooled us, implicitly at least, that there was always something on the other side of every line.

This is my favorite icon for that enlightenment, especially for folks of Dr. Fauci’s and my generations – – –

We know that the earth is round. We know there are people on it. We know that they are all like us. But when you fly around it time and time again —90 minutes to get around the whole earth—again and again and again, it comes in a different way. It doesn’t come in through the head. It comes in through the heart, in through the gut. When you come down from that experience, you’ve crossed thousands and thousands of borders and boundaries that are artificially created. They work nice on maps. You paint them orange and blue and green. But that’s not what it is when viewed from space. You don’t even see those boundaries and borders. We created them, guys, and it’s up to us to do something about it. …That’s what comes through to you when you’re up there in space, when you’re flying around this beautiful planet. –from “On Space,” by Rusty Schweickart, excerpted from The Magic of Conflict by Thomas F. Crum, pg. 85

In the 1960s – – – I turned 20 and Dr. Fauci was probably in medical school “enslaving his own mind” – – – the Environmental Movement, built on ecology, brought things down to earth. It nudged us into recognizing that biological organisms are interrelated and that although each organism has its own ecological niche, everything, affects everything else, often very indirectly.

And Chaos Theory with its butterfly flapping that Kansas tornado into existence expanded our core insights into interrelatedness.

And so we became aware that things we didn’t normally think of as related affecting each other wasn’t just limited to biology. It was the rule not the exception, and the word “ecology” became the go-to word to describe large-scale interrelatedness in general.

So, for example, business enterprises exist in an ecology. In fact, the entire economy is one huge interrelated ecosystem. And that ecosystem includes how you get your money and nearly everything you spend it on. Food for example. In other words, the economy is the central hub of our entire socio-economic ecosystem.

Without the interrelatedness of a well-functioning economy, a huge percentage of us would die, most from starvation.

The medical community is an integral part of that ecosystem. But only a part.

It seems that the medical experts our bureaucrats and elected prevaricators have put in charge — a mistake the ancient Greeks and P. Underwood Spencer wouldn’t have made — all flunked ecology, have forgotten or remain unaware of their ecological niche limitations, and have missed the Big Picture.

Just as Mr. Quigley suggested, enabled by the political establishment and fertilized by Main Stream Media, the medical-government-media complex is behaving as “a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve,” that is, it’s behaving as an out-of-control memetic machine.

So now, let’s put this devastating mistake in proper ecological perspective.

If, as implemented, lockdowns, masks and social distancing would stop COVID-19 the pandemic would be over. Clearly they don’t and it isn’t.

Epidemiologists told us early-on, once things got out of control of contact-tracing, as with other flues, there would be no stopping COVID-19 till it had run its course and one way or another, we reached so-called “herd immunity.”

They told us until herd immunity, the best we could do was to slow it down enough that it wouldn’t overwhelm the hospitals because that might lead to inadequate care in some cases and thus more deaths than otherwise expected.

This wouldn’t prevent infections, cases or deaths, it would just spread them out over time. Chaos Theory: Two Essa… Robert P. Murphy Best Price: $15.61 Buy New $7.00 (as of 04:50 EDT – Details)

You remember, “flatten the curve.”

So, as more realistically understood, the best the most extreme medically-proposed measures — particularly lockdowns — could hope for was preventing a relatively few extra deaths by protecting hospitals from serious overcrowding.

Still, isolated from the rest of the socio-economic ecosystem — and suitably hyped by the medical and pharma PR folks — and politicians — that sounds sortta reasonable. Doesn’t it?

However, once you take the medical-expert blinders off — and realize the MSM hasn’t — you can begin to drop this aberration into its niche in our full ecosystem. And you can begin to see the utter devastation this economically blind, idiocracy-worthy lockdown fiasco is still (January 2021 A.D.) wreaking on the world’s health and socio-economic ecology.

For starters, not to disvalue us older folks, but a significant majority of asserted COVID-19 victims are much older and we have fewer years to live. That means that the majority of any lives saved by lockdowns etc. would be, actuarially speaking, our less valuable lives. Taking that into account, this study concludes that COVID-19 Lockdowns [Are] Over 10 Times More Deadly Than the Pandemic Itself .

So the very most we get in return for what multi-credentialed Dr. Roger Hodkinson aptly called “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public“ is extending a relatively few lives of older folks and taking the pressure off hospital staff for awhile. And that’s the most you can hope for.

What’s the full Big Picture socio-economic cost for this?

For a quick, dirty, and mostly random sampling, in addition to the “10 Times More Deadly” figure above, we can start off with the CDC’s own records which document a 24% to 31% increase in pediatric mental health visits for children between the ages of 5 and 18.

And then, according to a September 2020 economic impact report by Yelp, 163,735 U.S. businesses had closed their doors as of August 31, 2020, and of those, 60% – a total of 97,966 businesses – were permanent closures. Hardest hit were minority enterprises. That’s from “Why Lockdowns Don’t Work and Hurt the Most Vulnerable” by Dr. Joseph Mercola. There’s a lot more in that article.

And then, if you’re concerned about saving lives, there’s this biggie:

“2021 Will Be Catastrophic” – UN Warns Of Humanitarian Crisis As 270 Million People May Starve

Once you have the blinders off — and realize the MSM still has them firmly in place — you can begin to see the costs vs. the benefits. I suggest whisky and tranquilizers — not at the same time of course. And you might want to keep your firearms out of reach.

We regularly hear, “Listen to the scientists!” But which scientists?

Despite the quite amazing attempt to censor folks who disagree with the ecologically challenged folks in charge, not all of our medical folks flunked ecology. Apparently only the ones the politicians and bureaucrats decided to put in charge.

Because so far, as of December 23, 2020, these 39,384 Medical practitioners and 13,035 Medical & Public Health Scientists signed The Great Barrington Declaration, dissing The Establishment’s alarmist, misleading destructive, and socio-economically ignorant handling of COVID-19.

The Declaration nails a few of the harmful effects like this – – –

“Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health … with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.” and “with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.” …”Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. ” …

And Great Barrington Declaration goes on to suggest this immediate correction:

“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. “

Then there’s Dr. David Nabbaro, the UK’s envoy to the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) bureaucracy. He’s condemned the mass coronavirus lockdowns as a “ghastly global catastrophe“ for crashing the world economy and doubling global poverty.

Unfortunately, in speaking out clearly, Dr. Nabbaro is somewhat of a W.H.O. rogue.

Even when you’re just consulting the experts and not worshiping them, there’s this final warning about them from inside science – – –

“Learn from science that you must doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” –Legendary physicist Richard Feynman

And OK, so it’s not fair to cast Dr. Fauci as the Grinch Who Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year, he’s just doing what any self-respecting expert would do in his position. It’s our fault for taking the elected liars who listened almost exclusively to him and his ecologically challenged brethern seriously. And especially it’s on us for taking their literally illegal dictats seriously.

We can stop now.

But, dang it, if there ever was an excuse for type casting – – –

Fauci tells Americans not to see their kids for Christmas | Fox News

So, is all this just socio-economic ignorance? I like to think so, but this haunts me – – –

“Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg, Spotlight.org

HERE for updates, additions, comments, and corrections.

AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!

L. Reichard White [send him mail] taught physics, designed and built a house, ran for Nevada State Senate, served two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, managed a theater company, etc. For the next few decades, he supported his writing habit by beating casinos at their own games. His hobby, though, is explaining things he wishes someone had explained to him. You can find a few of his other explanations listed here.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Difference Between Ecology and Economics | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 17, 2019

Ecologists, despite the current mania washing over the world’s media , understand complex spontaneous orders and bottom-up systems. They realize that meddling with an unpredictable and complicated system can destroy the qualities that made the system flourish. For some reason, they just fail to apply that insight to where it matters most – the economy.

https://mises.org/wire/difference-between-ecology-and-economics?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=7b9642e828-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-7b9642e828-228343965

The words ‘economy’ and ‘ecology’ have shared roots, both stemming from the Greek word oikos (οἶκος) for “house”. ‘Economy’ adds the suffix ‘nemein’ (νέμειν), for “manage”, creating ‘oikonomia’ for “household management”, or more commonly the “ the management of material resources ”, whereas ‘logia’ (λόγια) at the end of ‘ecology’ means “the study of”.

Despite these common linguistic roots, the convictions of their respective proponents have grown far, far apart. For anybody who has (un)willingly engaged in discussions with today’s environmentalists , this hardly comes as a surprise; they’re vicious , totalitarian , and entirely unwilling to consider benefits that come with, say, fossil fuels . Where those concerned with the ‘economy’ – economists – emphasize efficiency, trade-offs, and decentralized knowledge, those concerned with ‘ecology’ – ecologists or environmentalists – stress preservation, purity and top-down planning.

What’s striking about comparing the two is how environmentalists do apply proper economic insights – but very selectively and almost never about the economy.

The Origin of Ecology

Ecology’s origin as an intellectual movement was always deeply anti-capitalistic. Through Malthus, Rachel Carlson, Al Gore and more recently Greta Thunberg (or, as we should properly refer to her, “St Greta”), extreme hostility towards capitalism remains a core value of today’s environmentalists. What threatens our pristine and vulnerable nature was always consumption, population increases and economic growth.

Charles Mann, in his recent The Wizard and the Prophet shows how William Vogt – the most influential 20th century environmentalist you have never heard of – viewed capitalism as “the ultimate cause of most of the world’s ecological problems.”

Leaving his main biological theories aside, Vogt was all about humility before complex and uncertain processes that we do not fully comprehend – when considering ecosystems, that is. For improving eco-systems, Vogt and his modern-day disciplines espouse the limits of top-down intervention and the manipulations of natural outputs through fertilizers or genetic modifications. What is divinely provided by nature cannot be improved upon by humans. Their reasoning is that we cannot fully foresee or control the ecological responses; we might be doing more harm than good.

A myriad of ecological examples exist to support this point: rabbits introduced to Australia have condemned various tree species to extinction and greatly contributed to soil erosion across the continent – foxes introduced , either for hunting purposes or to deal with the rabbits, killed off defenseless mammals unaccustomed to such predators. Also in Australia, the cane toad – native to South America – was introduced to control insects, but ended up killing vast numbers of reptiles and crocodiles. Lionfish , probably from aquariums, have wreaked havoc in the Atlantic and Caribbean seas, gobbling up native fish and destroying reefs . The Small Indian Mongoose, introduced to islands in the Western Pacific and Hawaii in order to control rats, backfired and caused local extinction of birds and reptiles.

On the very same precautionary principle, more recent proposals such as eradicating disease-carrying mosquitos are opposed as they may threaten the world’s cocoa trees or have other unintended consequences – allegedly even more severe than the Malaria disease they intend to solve.

But Don’t Worry, We Can Manage the Economy

Nobody is really disputing that we don’t fully grasp ecological processes; they’re molecular, they’re global, they involve millions of species and microscopic chemical reactions that together create delicate outcomes that are often unforeseeable. Weather forecasting , while much improved in recent decades, is a case in point.

The thing is, economic processes are even more complicated than ecological ones. Why? Beyond the myriad of millions of millions of interactions, human beings – in contrast to rocks and atmospheres and bees – act. Unlike ants unyieldingly attracted by sugar or sharks by blood, human beings are endowed with frequently changing value scales – the same influences that work on animals work on us, plus our ability to restrict and limit them at will. We may abstain from eating, doing, pursuing or completing anything on cultural or societal or religious grounds. We choose , which makes us even more complicated than animals or trees or carbon dioxide molecules.

Even when the policy relevance for the two fields overlap, as in climate change debates and environmental policy making, the very ecologists who minutes before emphasized the complex and unpredictable nature of the system are happy to make oddly specific proposals:

· Tax or ban everything that moves ( meat , airfares , wealth , energy ); subsidize everything that doesn’t. That couldn’t possibly affect the economy, could it?

We can mention other areas where the broadly left-progressive position on complex systems is surprisingly upside-down.

On religion, progressives are happy to ridicule some conservatives for their skepticism towards evolution. Believing that remarkably well-adapted designs imply a designer is a failure of understanding selection in complex systems and is obviously wrong, they say. On correcting undesired outcomes of capitalist markets, an even more complicated system than human biology, the very same progressives are happy to empower, endorse and expand benign governments’ power to intervene. The same bottom-up spontaneous order that ecologists identify in nature somehow doesn’t translate over to the economic sphere; previously very scientific and Enlightened leftists suddenly flip and finds top-down interventions not just feasible but desirable.

On the riches of natural wonders (Hawaiian rainforests, Grand Canyon riverbeds, Icelandic volcanoes or Amazon rainforests ), conservationist ecologists oppose development in every shape or form. The reason? To protect the pristine environment from hard-to-predict human impacts. Fair enough, but that limits the number and kind of people that can access these our planet’s wonders – restricting them from the very poor and underprivileged groups left-leaning people generally claim to represent. Shouldn’t we share – redistribute – that natural wealth as widely as possible?

No, they say, since the ecosystem is vulnerable and human meddling would damage and destroy it. Now, replace “natural wonders” with economic wonders (products and fortunes built by the Jeff Bezos and Steve Jobs and Francoise Meyers of the world), ought not the system that created them – free market capitalism – be similarly protected? No, objects the naive ecologist; we ought to share this wealth as widely as possible, impacts to the system be damned.

Ecologists, despite the current mania washing over the world’s media , understand complex spontaneous orders and bottom-up systems. They realize that meddling with an unpredictable and complicated system can destroy the qualities that made the system flourish. For some reason, they just fail to apply that insight to where it matters most – the economy.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »