Exploit-the-Earth Day

Tuesday, April 22, was Earth Day, an utterly unhappy affair. Therefore, I celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day instead. It occurs on the same day; however, it is not concerned with the hatred of man as Earth Day is. Exploit-the-Earth Day celebrates man's greatness and superiority over the environment, while Earth Day degrades man and identifies him as a vicious plague upon the invaluable earth.
There are three major problems I have with Earth Day, and they all concern hating man as previously stated. Earth Day celebrates the lowest form of altruism, inherent value, and inside-the-box thinking.
As I have stated in previous posts, altruism is a vice. Altruism teaches that one's life is worthless and in order to give it any value one must live his life, sacrifice his life, destroy his life, for the sake of others, complete strangers. I can think of nothing more vicious, except choosing to be ignorant. However, Earth Day adopts altruism in a whole new way; subsequently, making it more vicious than its original meaning. The original meaning of altruism is solely concerned with man. A man must sacrifice his life to other men. Still vicious, but completely on the human tier. Earth Day lowers altruism to a new disgusting form because it argues that man's life is of no value unless he lives it to preserve the earth as it would exist without him. Therefore, Earth Day celebrates the destruction of man's life for the sake of the environment. This is completely twisted and utterly stomach churning. I have addressed this briefly in previous posts particularly when I spoke about the crow video, but I am going to address it again and more in depth here. It is completely irrational to assume that the environment, trees and animals, things completely devoid of all reason are more valuable than man, a being who's reason is inherent. This is a completely warped sense of morality that the utterly irrational should be preserved by destroying the inherently rational. Some will argue that Earth Day does not celebrate this, but a cooperative existence with the environment. Man should not be cooperatively living with the environment. To cooperatively live with the environment is to give the environment respect, which assumes that the environment is equally valuable to that of man. The environment is inferior to man. Therefore, man should be concerned with living without regard to the environment. If a man owns large tracts of land and wants to build condominiums and sky scrappers on that land, the man should have no qualms about bulldozing each tract. Of course, I would recommend he sell the trees and the animals to make some profit before hand and offset the cost of his building. However, this idea that the trees, animals, condominiums, and sky scrappers should be able to exist to their fullest at the same time is wrong. Of course, some will argue that the environment is inherently valuable, and it would be vicious to destroy what is valuable. I agree to some extent, but this leads me to my next point.
Before I continue, I would like to point out that I was a Boy Scout and I earned the rank of Eagle Scout. Currently, I am also advising a Venture Crew. I have other problems with these organizations, but overall I find them beneficial. Of course, the wider scope of this is for a later post. I am just trying to point out I have had my fair share interacting with the environment, and I admit I enjoy it. The past summer I went hiking with some friends through the White Mountains, I have hiked in the Catskills, and I have been camping several times. I enjoyed everyone of those experiences. I like looking at the mountains and seeing the wide valleys and forests from the tops. I like the way the woods look in the early morning. However, I will not admit the environment has inherent value. That is a lie. The truth is the environment only has value because man exists. If man was extinct, which would mean all reason was dead, then the mountains would not be beautiful. There would be nothing attractive about valleys, forests, early mornings, or starry nights. Furthermore, none of nature would be important. Mountains, forests, valleys, deserts, trees, animals, etc. would all be worthless. This is because there would be no reason to value them; there would be no men to value it. Environmentalists forget that value presumes a valuer. Something cannot have value unless it is valued by someone. Some will argue that the animals and the plants value the environment. This is not true. Animals and trees are devoid of reason, and reason is necessary to value. Reason means one has the ability to determine virtue and vice, which means he also has the ability to identify good and bad in the sense of more valuable versus less valuable, or likeable versus dislikeable. Plants certainly cannot do this. Animals cannot do this either because they are shackled by instinct. Foxes do not live in dens because they like dens. Foxes live in dens because instinct tells them to live in dens so they will not die and they can reproduce. Koala's do not like eucalyptus leaves. Koala's are just ordered by their instinct to eat eucalyptus leaves. Therefore, the environment has no value without man, yet environmentalists want man to lower their impact on the environment or destroy themselves so that in both cases the environment can sustain its inherent value. Earth Day celebrates the environment's alleged inherent value, and since the environment has no inherent value Earth Day celebrates a falsehood; consequently, Earth Day is irrational.
However, other environmentalists, the more logical of the sort, will argue that the environment must be preserved for man's sake. These environmentalists argue that if man harms the environment too much the earth will not be able to sustain man's life. In turn, man will become extinct, which is certainly no good. This is selfish environmentalism, which is far more rational and respectable than the other environmentalists; however, these environmentalists are not completely rational. Their stance inherently restricts reason; thus, promoting a certain level of ignorance. This stance supports inside-the-box thinking. The best way to depict this problem with through an a story I constantly heard in elementary school. My elementary school science teachers always told the class that one day the sun would implode or explode, something to the effect that the sun would go out. The class would then respond with the general idea that, "Oh, well, by the time that happens we will all be dead, so it won't kill us." I always thought to myself and I continue to think that by the time that happens man will have found a substitute; man will no longer need the sun because he will provide it for himself in some way. Environmentalism has a similar stance. In analyzing global warming environmentalists will argue that if carbon emissions are not lowered and other regulations are not followed then the environment will descend into chaos. I do not really understand all that science stuff, but apparently hurricane Katrina is a sign of that. Therefore, the environment must be preserved, man must slow his development, so the environment will not descend into chaos and kill off the human race. I offer an outside-of-the-box solution. Instead, how about scientists focus on ways to create environment instead of preserving environment. Find ways to create a sun, atmosphere, air, plants, and animals. Find a new energy and more efficient energy source for when oil runs out. Create the environment man needs to survive do not preserve it. Once man create the necessary environment to sustain human life, then man can manipulate it from its immediate construction so that it will not be destroyed as man continues to industrialize, become more technological, and creates more machines. Earth Day does not celebrate this progressive thinking. Earth Day celebrates the present, the natural state of things, stagnation. Earth Day celebrates the limiting of man. I have proposed the exact opposite. I have proposed that man move forward to by creating his own living condition. Man does not need the environment; man has reason.
Therefore, since Earth Celebrates the irrational devaluing and limitation of man I propose a new day of celebration. Actually, I am not really proposing it. Exploit-the-Earth Day has been proposed by The Objective Standard, and Objectivist journal. I am supporting The Objective Standard's proposal. Thus, on the next April 22 celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day. Celebrate man's greatness, his reason, his egoism, and his independence. On Exploit-the-Earth Day do not limit one's actions, do not preserve the environment as is, control the environment. Cut down a tree, have a pork roast, run one's factory for an extra hour, celebrate productivity. Celebrate the fact that man does not look at the environment and see what is but what can be. On Exploit-the-Earth celebrate the fact that man is supreme and not of the ignorant earth.