Monday, 27 February 2017

On Mass Immigration and Environmentalism

I would consider myself to be an environmentalist. I know the term has become highly tainted as of late, and I would be lying if I said I didn't have deep criticisms towards many elements of the modern environmentalist movement, but I use the term to describe myself none the less as few satisfying alternative terms exist. I certainly believe in the preservation and indeed expansion of wilderness and natural environments as far as is practical. Whilst I have my doubts about the theory of anthropocentric climate change, I do still think it is entirely sensible we keep air, water and land pollution to a bare minimum and we should always be looking for cleaner, more efficient and sustainable energy sources. I think modern agricultural practices are highly destructive and should be completely overhauled in favour of a more permacultural system. But fundamentally I believe mankind should once again view himself as an integral part of nature, always striving work with her, not against her, a view strongly inspired by the works of Henry David Thoreau, John Muir and Edward Abbey. A view that I find is increasingly at odds with the modern, 'UN approved' environmentalist model, which would seemingly prefer to herd humans into cities and fence off the natural world entirely, but that's another criticism for another day.

The subject I wish to talk about here is a common cognitive dissonance I see with many self proclaimed environmentalists today. It has surely not escaped the attention of most that a significant majority of modern environmentalists are dyed in the wool left wingers. Although environmentalism in and of itself should be considered politically neutral, in recent decades it has been almost entirely co-opted by the left and invariably goes hand in hand with other common leftist talking points, anti-capitalism, social justice, social welfare, anti-racism, feminism, gay rights, multiculturalism and pro-immigration. And it is that last point where I see the glaring contradiction. I happened to be reading through the 2015 manifesto of the Green Party the other day out of curiosity, their immigration policy in particular caught my attention. Effectively they are in favour of lifting most of the current restrictions on immigration into the United Kingdom, a policy that would no doubt attract vastly greater numbers of migrants to our shores (and the numbers are high as they stand already). Now I find it utterly baffling how anybody purporting to care about the environment could ever advocate for such a policy. Folks, mass immigration is terrible for the environment of the host nation.

It's very simple really, more immigration means more people, and more people means we have to destroy green spaces to build more homes and amenities. It means we have to generate more energy, extract and import more resources. It means more vehicles on the road, and in small, already highly populated European countries such as Britain, it means denser traffic patterns, more gridlock, further exacerbating the air pollution problem. It means we have to intensify agriculture to keep up with food demands, which harms local insect ecology and further degrades the soil, or it means we have rely ever more on food imports from abroad. It means more waste in the landfills, more litter on the streets, in our countryside, coastlines and waterways. And what I find particularly galling about this, is that these same environmentalists are well aware of the highly destructive effects overpopulation has upon the environment, and yet here they are, advocating for policies that will directly cause overpopulation. In the case of my own nation, Britain, we are already one the most densely populated countries in Europe. We have a housing shortage and will need to build somewhere in the region of 250,000 new homes every year to accommodate the rising population, a population rise almost entirely attributed to immigration. We have already long surpassed our ability to be self sufficient in food production and now have to import over a quarter of our food, a figure that will only rise as the population increases and more of our arable land must be given over for housing. Mass immigration will in the long run turn much our once green and pleasant land into a miserable, overpopulated and polluted, concrete jungle. But still, the liberal environmentalist balks at the very suggestion we should ever close the doors on immigration.

Edward Abbey expressed similar sentiments in his later works, including an excellent short excellent essay, "Immigration and Liberal Taboos". He was viciously castigated for it by the leftist elements of the environmentalist movement during his time, some even calling him a "racist". So where does this cognitive dissonance come from? I suspect many of the liberal environmentalists are little more than virtue signallers, naively adopting all the popular leftist viewpoints, going along to get along but never actually sitting down and thinking about what they truly believe in. I'd like to think some of the more thoughtful and intelligent ones who do truly care about the environment, would eventually see when presented with the facts how undesirable mass immigration is for their cause, but rarely are they ever presented with the full facts from authority. So what of these so called 'environmentalists' in positions of power and authority, the leaders of the various 'green' parties, and other left leaning environmental organisations? What is their excuse for advocating a policy as environmentally destructive as mass migration? My argument would be that they do not care about the environment. They are wolves in sheep's clothing, using environmentalism as a front to garner popular support, but ultimately they are pursuing their own broader agendas that have little to do with saving the natural environment and everything to do with controlling people. They are not be trusted and I call upon all true environmentalists to reject them entirely, particularly any environmental organisations seeking political power. If you really want to help the environment, then do so on an individual and local community basis. Volunteer with a local wildlife reserve, plant trees, restore habitats. Reduce your reliance on big government, the energy industry and big agribusiness by learning about agrarianism, permaculture, homesteading and survivalism. If you have the facilities and capability, grow, forage and hunt your own food, generate your own energy using solar or wind power. Encourage your local community to do the same, create community gardens, start seed circles, farmers markets and share surplus food with your friends and family. And just to round of this post nicely, don't be afraid to demand stronger immigration controls.


No comments:

Post a Comment