Mark Levin: Environmental movement is primitive. (Ayn Rand's "Return of the Primitive")
Mark Levin has been commenting lately about the Enviros being primitive.
This clip is the first time I believe he used that term.
In later shows, which I unfortunately can not find clips for, he gives attribution to the term "primitive" in this context to "the great writer Ayn Rand."
Ayn Rand mentioned in a Mark Levin rant?
That's great radio.
This clip is the first time I believe he used that term.
In later shows, which I unfortunately can not find clips for, he gives attribution to the term "primitive" in this context to "the great writer Ayn Rand."
Ayn Rand mentioned in a Mark Levin rant?
That's great radio.
He gave a very rough description of the background of ANWAR in Alaska, which Obama wants to lock up from oil production (watch out for another National Monument presidential decree to bypass Congress, but he didn't discuss that). He emphasized the primitivist mindset of the viros but only in very general terms with no explanation, and said that the attacks on oil production at ANWAR are "ideologically driven, by the primitives. Ayn Rand's book, 'The Primitives'." Nothing else about Ayn Rand or the book in that show (the actual title of which is the "Return of the Primitive", originally "The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution").
jumping around like the natives in "Medicine Man"
and that is sure primitive! . the political drive for
power has these crazies drunk beyond belief. -- j
As for the environmentalists, notwithstanding my admiration for human ingenuity and technology, there is room for caution when humans affect their life support system on a scale that at first only our canaries in the coalmine notice, so of course we disdain and disbelieve them. Remember thalidomide? Sometimes we do do stupid and harmful things without meaning to. Caution is prudent.
As for global warming or climate change, the planet has done so for millions of years and will continue to do so. I for one welcome warming, to make more areas habitable. Just be alert for points of no return, such as compromising potable water, breathable air and the biodiversity needed for long-term food supply.
Befouling our nest is reckless. I look forward to when a balanced cycling system will be developed between our waste and our production, a global symbiosis. Earthworms and bacteria are vastly underappreciated for their part in the circle of life. Too bad we can't wait for what would emerge eventually if nature were left to her own devices. We are here now. It's up to us to engineer the balance.
As for "primitive", it is an instinctive response to perceived danger, like a cat too far out on a limb needing to retrace to an earlier, safer position. It is a childish desire to return to a carefree state, the supposedly idyllic paradise that nature supplied without human intervention and human responsibility.Too late, kids. We've come this far; we'll have to think our way forward from here. That's what our reasoning and inventive brains are for. Still, I don't write off our canaries--they are the early-warning system of possible impending disaster. Too bad the majority of people don't act until things get bad enough, and then their responses may be ill-considered.
Now if only these environmentalists were as concerned for the cultural climate changes--the dysfunctional belief systems that infect so many people running our world, leading to endless wars and destruction. That's where activism should shine. Barbarism and war mentalities are the true primitives.
Believers implies a position that doesn't rest on evidence, such as a belief in people's right to their own life. Anthropogenic global warming is a scientific claim that should be *accepted* (not believed) on the weight of the evidence. A scientific-minded person welcomes new evidence.
"GW believer's are most certainly against technology."
This does not ring at all true to me, but I haven't seen any surveys. I would expect people who accept scientific findings would also be for technology, which is applied science.
"In fact-Germany was so influenced by these anti-thinking groups, they agreed to shut down 8 nuclear plants over the last several years"
This is a bad decision since we know fossil fuels are finite, some of them cause local pollution, and there's strong evidence all of them are affecting the climate in a costly way. I think people are afraid of nuclear because they know it can be dangerous but they don't know the details, so it seems like unlimited danger.
About four years ago I found AS and Fountainhead. They not only condemn the empty calories of an ideological struggle but give insight into why people get sucked into the notion and how the group-identity part of it sucks the life out of people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aprcqLMY...
Wow. I've heard Limbaugh, and he's no where near my views. I find liberal commentators, who I'm more likely to agree with, equally tiresome.
I can sort of enjoy a few minutes of the empty calories of listening to someone paint the world as an ideological struggle, in which I'm one of the good guys and most of my problems are somebody else's fault. I obviously know that's not true, so I can only enjoy it if it comes with humor.
I almost never use that word. Can you find a prior case of my using it? I probably say "inconceivable" more often than "moron".
Mark Levin's shows can be listened to or downloaded as audio files at http://feeds.feedburner.com/marklevinsho....
Summaries along with articles he cited or read from during each show are at http://www.marklevinshow.com/dailyrecap.
Itunes (Juice, etc.) podcasts of the shows can be subscribed to at https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/offi...
I wish he had done a technically better job (but then, he would loose his audience, wouldn't he?) of quoting the environmentalists on what they say they want and then refuting that. I do agree with his basic thesis, but I think that the tools he uses to support it are the same ones that make me disregard arguments from the Left.
Jan
Load more comments...