kfl%mx.lcs.mit.edu@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.UUCP (07/31/86)
Return-Path: <@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 86 00:26:03 EDT
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: People vs. Animals
To: dab@BORAX.LCS.MIT.EDU
From: dab@BORAX.LCS.MIT.EDU (David A. Bridgham)
The farmer had a position of dominance over the crops he had sown.
... You go on to mention that this is slavery so maybe I
misunderstand what you were saying here.
You sure do. It is slavery only if PEOPLE are treated like crops.
I don't understand why the moral framework in which humans
are considered on the same level as plants and animals is immoral,
and I don't believe that this is how most of mankind lives today
or has lived in the past. Mankind has believed in his dominance
over the rest of creation for many many years and he certainly
does so today.
What I meant was the system in which most people are relegated to
the status of animals or objects or incompetents. The idea being that
the elite must run these people's lives. The elite has never regarded
itself the equal of animals or incomepetents. They have always
regarded most of the rest of mankind that way, however. This attitude
is alive and well, as can be seen in the Meese report, in which it is
solemnly concluded, based, not on science, but on 'common sense', that
most of us can't be trusted with pornography. This must be kept from
us, we are told, along with firearms and drugs, for our own good.
Believes this to the extent that he now seems to believe that he
is completely seperated and independent of everything but himself
and his creations.
I don't know anyone who believes this. We are a part of the natural
physical universe and cannot be seperated from it.
If you defoliate a quarter of a million acres, errode away most of
the topsoil, pollute it so baddly that the animal population
decreases by two orders of magnitude and many animals are now
absent from the area altogether, that's ok, as long as you succeed
on the free market.
If you own the land, you are free to do whatever you want with it.
Presumably you would destroy its future value only for something of
much greater value that cannot be obtained in any other way. This is
your choice if you own the land.
I do oppose government handouts for farmers who have damaged their
land by destructive farming techniques. Perhaps one of the reasons
why people are doing this to the land is because of those very
subsidies and handouts? Not that a whole lot of land is being
destroyed. And not that the damage is as long lasting as most people
seem to think.
...Keith
-------