Mine Your Own Business: Misanthropy Exposed

I would like to make a recommendation for the film “Mine Your Own Business.” The film’s site can be found at www.mineyourownbusiness.org and has been the subject of some controversy. The film exposes the misanthropic philosophy at the heart of the Environmentalist movement.

The documentary displays how rich western environmentalists oppose economic development, on the grounds that for a poor rural village to develop and progress would destroy its “quaint” culture.

This film raises very strong philosophical issues. For one, a particularly noxious environmentalist (who owns a catamaran and luxury villa in Madagascar) alleges that Madagascans have a greater quality of life than rich New Yorkers because Madagascans have less stress. According to him, health, education, and material possessions are not considered quality-of-life indicators by Madagascans because the local culture does not value them. This environmentalists claims his interviewer; an unemployed and poor Romanian miner, does not understand the nature of poverty, and that poverty is essentially a matter of subjective perception.

Another eco-fascist, living in rich Islington, London, claims that mining in Chile will destroy the locals ‘spiritual reality’ by severing their connection with the ‘sacred mountains.’ Earlier in the piece, a fellow tree-hugger alleges that people in the Romanian Village of Rosia Motana would rather stick to traditional horse-and-cart travel than use a car. The film shows all these allegations to be patently ludicrous: people there are just like people here, and they want a job, and they want to be happy, and their happiness has certain material requirements.

Now to the question: why the hell have these Jet-Set-Yacht-Owning-Bollinger-Bolshevik-Enviro-Nazi’s believe otherwise? The reason is (surprise!) a deep philosophical difference in the area of Human Nature. What is the nature of humans?

These Environmentalists believe that humans are “social constructs.” This means that the content of their minds; their thoughts/beliefs/philosophies/personalities/values/psychologies/etc. are determined (not just influenced, but DETERMINED, in the sense of they are utterly incapable of changing, resisting conditioning, or thinking for themselves) by their social environment. As such, those that live in Rosia Montana are conditioned to live a ‘quaint’ life of rural poverty that makes them prefer raising cattle and growing their own vegetables and using an outhouse in -20c weather. To remove them from this environment would psychologically destroy them, meaning that it is best for them to live their ‘quaint’ lifestyle of starvation. Hence, Madagascans do not value having a life with abundant food and education; their ‘culture’ does not value it, and as such economic development will alienate them from their culture, so they will be ‘poorer’ with wealth (a la Clive Hamilton)! Hence, Chilean farm laborers should not be allowed the opportunity to work for a mine that will pay them double what they are currently earning, because that will destroy their ‘ethnic reality.’

The simple fact of the matter is that these theories are not new. They all boil down to a denial of the concept of humanity is rational and with free will. They say humans do not act on the basis of reason, their minds are controlled by their social context (this idea drives multiculturalism, which claims because the collective controls our thoughts, members of different collectives cannot get along). Other versions of this terrible lie are: humans cannot think, they only act on the basis of tradition (Oakshottean conservatism), humans cannot (or should not) think, they only act (or should act) on the basis of faith (religious rightism and any form of religious politics), humans cannot think, they are controlled by their genetics (Nazism), humans cannot think, they are controlled by their nationality (Fascism), and humans cannot think, they are controlled by their economic circumstances (Marxism).

I think that by now the facts are relatively clear. A hatred of progress is a rejection of reason and free will, which in effect (although not always in principle) is a rejection of human life.

And these sick misanthropes claim that they actually care about people. How appalling.  

7 thoughts on “Mine Your Own Business: Misanthropy Exposed

  1. I find it hard enough to know what I want from my life let alone worrying what some fella in a village in Chile should want for his life. Maybe I’m just lazy but figuring out what is good for everybody else seems like a rather exhausting passtime.

  2. But if all these quaint places disappear, where will we go for our holidays? How can we look down on people if they are the same as ourselves? I know New Zealand isn’t that far away, but I want to go to different places to feel superior! I want to go where our dollar is valued! (Not just Tassie)

  3. Poverty only seems “fun” to people who haven’t lived it.

    Backpacking through asia I constantly hear comments from middle-class trendies about how happy the country peasants, are comments and/or implications about how evil development is… but if you actually chat to the people in poverty none of them think it is quant or fun. They all want development. And they all want to be able to afford to go to the dentist or buy new clothes or send their children to university.

  4. The bummer about this is that the perpetrators of this nonsense have a grand argument against the film: It’s partially financed by the company who wants to do the mining.

    It’s tiresome to point out some study, report or article which proves a point I’m trying to make only to have some bozo quoting sourcewatch.org back at me in lieu of a decent argument against it.

  5. Cartman,

    The film DISCLOSES that Gabriel Resources partly financed it in the first ten minutes. Someone wanting to deceive people would not disclose that. And may I add, GR had absolutely no editorial control over the film.

  6. First whether a film, comment, story, book, pamphlet, song, or poem, is right or wrong depends on the facts, not who sponsored it. Cartman, ask them to prove it is wrong, based on falsehoods, or inaccurate, the finance is not relevant.

    Any business promoting a project will spend money on whatever medium that will achieve such promotion, which is just plain common sense. It is ludicrous to suggest that this automatically makes such promotion dishonest, or fraudulent. Facts determine this.

    Second, it is an indictment of social engineering and the type of people who push it that they believe that the third world should be kept as is, so they can have some sort of living museum piece.

    All people have the right to aspire to better things.

    We can only hope that the governments of the countries involved allow projects to go ahead, and ignore these pompous, condescending bastards.

Comments are closed.