I risk becoming a boorish agitator here, but here goes with my leftist-bashing again...

Some comments from the Earth Island Institute's leadership on the glories of poverty.

Gar Smith is the epitome of the elitism and anti-humanism of these people. This is your environmental movement, folks. Take a good look at what you are defending. And don't try to tell me that these are extremists. They are the ones calling the shots in national policy and other areas. These are the ones running the show at the U.N.

..."The idea that people are poor doesn't mean that they are not living good lives," Smith said.



Smith called the developing world's poverty "relative" and explained "you can't really have poverty unless you have wealthy people on the scene."

Smith decried the introduction of electricity to the poor residents of the developing world.

"I don't think a lot of electricity is a good thing. It is the fuel that powers a lot of multi-national imagery," Smith said.

According to Smith, electricity can wreak havoc on cultures. "I have seen villages in Africa that had vibrant culture and great communities that were disrupted and destroyed by the introduction of electricity," he said.

With the introduction of electricity, the African villagers spent too much time watching television and listening to the radio, allowing their more primitive traditional ways to fade away, according to Smith.

Smith lamented that "people who used to spend their days and evenings in the streets playing music on their own instruments and sewing clothing for their neighbors on foot peddle powered sewing machines" lost their culture with the advent of electricity.

"If there is going to be electricity, I would like it to be decentralized, small, solar-powered," Smith said.

Smith challenged Americans to give up their own modern conveniences.

"The real question is what personal conveniences and self indulgences are you willing to give up in order to stop destroying the planet?" he asked rhetorically.

The U.S. is not a model for the rest of the world to follow because "the level at which Americans consume is unsustainable," according to Smith. He projected that if the rest of the world consumed at rates similar to the U.S.,
the environmental degradation would require "three extra planets to exploit."

He called the notion that the U.S. needs to export the "American way" of life nothing more than "myth making" and revealed that many of his friends have already voluntarily given up automobiles in favor of bicycles and mass transit.

Smith used the collapse of communism in the former Soviet Union as an example of how to solve ecological problems.

"There is a solution to climate change and pollution. We saw it happen to Russia when their economy collapsed. Their industrial plants closed down, the skies got clear. Their air is a lot cleaner now," Smith said.



Read that last sentence over and over until it is burned into your brain. THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT.

Worth reading is the response of Patrick Moore, who as an environmentalist who is reasonable and pro-human, has been bitterly attacked by the rest of the radical environmental movement.

..."It's that kind of arrogance that is coming from a movement that is basically white upper-middle class and is saying that it's neat to have Africans with no electricity," Moore told CNSNews.com.



"It is the same tendency that has caused Europeans to conquer the whole planet in the first place," explained Moore.

Moore said Smith's views represent a "naive vision of returning to some kind of Garden of Eden, which was actually not that great because the average life span was 35."

"What a terrible thing to say. It's just so obviously stupid -- this romanticization of poverty, where people can't afford to fix their teeth, can't afford decent nutrition, can't afford proper health care, can't afford education," stated Moore.

"What does he think -- that some illiterate with her teeth falling out in the mountains is a good thing?" asked Moore.

The dire poverty that exists in the developing countries, especially in Africa and Latin America are a "kind of poverty that no one would wish on anyone," according to Moore.

But Moore said many of the poverty stricken residents of the developing world do seem optimistic despite their conditions.

"It is amazing that hope springs eternal and people with their teeth falling out who are dying of malnutrition, still laugh during the day. But that doesn't mean it's good," Moore said.

Moore now views the environmental movement as having lost its original mission of ecological protection and is now occupied with encouraging class envy and anti-capitalist rhetoric.

"The environmentalists try to inject guilt into people for consuming, as if consuming by itself causes destruction to the environment. There is no truth to that. You have the wealthiest countries on earth with the best looked after
environment" he explained.

Poverty, not wealth, is one of the biggest threats to the Earth's ecological health, according to Moore. "Look at the environmental destruction caused by poverty. They have no money left to reforest, they have no money left to
prevent soil erosion, there is no money to clean their water after they make it dirty," he said.

Moore does not have much regard for the environmentalists attending the Earth Summit.

"They are mainly political activists with not very much actual science background who are using the rhetoric of environmentalism to push agendas that are more political than they are ecological," Moore said.



Couldn't have said any of it better myself.