The Hypocrisy of “Unsustainable Development” (aka Wrong Pulpit, Sir!)
Here we go with another environmental conference yet again hearing of impending Doom&Gloom
Addressing the two-day forum's main topic — the feasibility of sustainable development for billions of people worldwide — [Jeffrey Sachs, director of the UN Millennium Project] painted a grim picture of systemic environmental collapse, coupled with war, famine and pandemic disease. The astonishing pace of economic growth in Asia and the increasing demands of development in the industrialised world will in a matter of decades, Sachs argued, impose a burden far beyond that which the world is already woefully failing to carry. "It is the central challenge we face on the planet," he said. "Every single major ecological system we have is already under profound stress."
This is not today's news.
I remember Clare Short, former UK minister, making a similar point
And the point is, "sorry guys but if you're poor today you must stay that way"
This is an incredibly baseless remark. Let's put aside the fact that apart than in the mind of the environment-as-religion lobby, there is little indication for any impending gloom. Let's also put aside the fact that economic development has in the last few decades taken millions out of poverty
The biggest hypocrisy is that neither Mr Sachs, nor Ms Short have shown any intention to show the way, move to a remote area, and live off the land to eliminate their own contribution to this baseless "disaster"
I remember those in the 70's, preaching collapse by overpopulation, to whom the only serious answer should have been "when are you going to help the world, and eliminate yourself?"
Obviously we don't need Jeffrey Sachs to act so drastically.
But who would accept Marie Antoinette talking of there being not enough bread, while eating croissants?
What is the meaning of telling humanity that it can't get rich, from the pulpit of Columbia University's Alfred Lerner Hall?