Exploding the Ecosystem…Let’s review the ‘how’ and the ‘why.’
1. Haeckel, the originator of the term ‘ecology,’ and protagonist of Hegel’s view of the dominance of the state over the individual, gained stature in England as well as Germany. The reason was simple: his ideas of controlling everything included the molding of human nature.
2. The Fabians, Beatrice and Sidney Webb at Oxford, infatuated with Haeckel not just as a way to understand nature, saw the ideas as a scheme for social engineering, for control of society’s environment. Oxford invented Hegelian ecology….unity, the whole….there is no separateness from nature. Hegelian ecology is the total control of everything.
Nickson, "Eco-Fascists," chapter five.
3. Now, the vassals of environmentalism, otherwise known as the ‘reliable Democrat voter,’ will recoil at the following, because confronting actual education is as antithetical to them as confronting evil….which is why they are pacifists, too.
Here, your remedial:
a. In 1935, Oxford botanist Arthur Tansley invented the idea of the ‘ecosystem’…interaction of all of the living and nonliving part in an area. While it is “the basic unit of nature,” following Hegel, it is more fundamental than the individuals that make it up.
Starting to see the totalitarian connection?
b. “Though the organisms may claim our prime interest, when we are trying to think fundamentally, we cannot separate them from their special environments, with which they form one physical system.”
AG Tansley, Ecology 16 (3): 284–307
c. The view combined the balance and unity of nature; and statist at its core.
4. In 1946, G.E.Hutchinson advanced the idea that the ecosystem was a feedback loop of energy that keeps the system stable in the face of environmental disturbances: a healthy ecosystem is in balance, and recoils to balance when disturbed. Further, biological diversity promotes stability.
a. This is the idea that demands acceptance, and belief: diversity and balance means ecosystem health.
b. The enthusiasts were enraptured by the idea of the “oneness” of nature, and the pantheism of Thoreau, Rousseau, John Muir, ….the ecosystem became God!
5. Hold tight: here comes the uh-oh…it was theoretical. Immanuel Kant had insisted that science be based on empirical evidence. Instead…these ‘scientists’ had explained life on earth using a hypothetical construct that does not exist!!! No healthy, self-regulating ‘balanced ecosystem’ has ever been found!
a. “What we call …an ecosystem is often a fiction, an arbitrary restriction of spatial boundaries, rather than a reflection…of species change.”
Simon Levin, Professor of Biology, Princeton, “Fragile Dominion: Complexity and the Commons,” p.71 (1999).
b. “The concept of ‘The Balance of Nature,” so politically successful in the 1960’s and 1970’s, has been dismissed by ecological science….Unfortunately, however, many of the laws designed to regulate ecological resources were passed when “The Balance of Nature” paradigm was king….” http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=delpf
c. “Sixty years after the ecosystem idea surfaced in the scientific literature; after decades of dominance on university campuses; after thousands of books, articles, conferences, and monographs; scholars cannot agree on the most fundamental matters regarding ecosystems. They do not agree on what constitutes the core characteristics of ecosystems. They cannot say where ecosystems begin or end in space or time, or tell us when one ecosystem replaces another on the landscape.
They cannot agree on how to locate ecosystems. They offer no generally accepted definitions or measures of health, integrity, or sustainability. The state of the science concerning the ecosystem notion and its attendant ideas provides little scientific justification for the radical change in public policy proposed by the Clinton administration.” Ecosystem Management: | PERC Fitzsimmons, Allan K. 1999. Defending Illusions: Federal Protection of Ecosystems. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
6. The idea of environmentalism is not science, it is political. Once the uninformed can be made to accept the unproven bogus concepts, biology is a religion. The concepts are designed to trump individuals and individual rights. It is a wonderful tool for the eco-fascist.
Now listen for the squealing of the stuck pigs....who never realized that the fabrications of environmentalism were merely an excuse to demand control over everyone and everything.
1. Haeckel, the originator of the term ‘ecology,’ and protagonist of Hegel’s view of the dominance of the state over the individual, gained stature in England as well as Germany. The reason was simple: his ideas of controlling everything included the molding of human nature.
2. The Fabians, Beatrice and Sidney Webb at Oxford, infatuated with Haeckel not just as a way to understand nature, saw the ideas as a scheme for social engineering, for control of society’s environment. Oxford invented Hegelian ecology….unity, the whole….there is no separateness from nature. Hegelian ecology is the total control of everything.
Nickson, "Eco-Fascists," chapter five.
3. Now, the vassals of environmentalism, otherwise known as the ‘reliable Democrat voter,’ will recoil at the following, because confronting actual education is as antithetical to them as confronting evil….which is why they are pacifists, too.
Here, your remedial:
a. In 1935, Oxford botanist Arthur Tansley invented the idea of the ‘ecosystem’…interaction of all of the living and nonliving part in an area. While it is “the basic unit of nature,” following Hegel, it is more fundamental than the individuals that make it up.
Starting to see the totalitarian connection?
b. “Though the organisms may claim our prime interest, when we are trying to think fundamentally, we cannot separate them from their special environments, with which they form one physical system.”
AG Tansley, Ecology 16 (3): 284–307
c. The view combined the balance and unity of nature; and statist at its core.
4. In 1946, G.E.Hutchinson advanced the idea that the ecosystem was a feedback loop of energy that keeps the system stable in the face of environmental disturbances: a healthy ecosystem is in balance, and recoils to balance when disturbed. Further, biological diversity promotes stability.
a. This is the idea that demands acceptance, and belief: diversity and balance means ecosystem health.
b. The enthusiasts were enraptured by the idea of the “oneness” of nature, and the pantheism of Thoreau, Rousseau, John Muir, ….the ecosystem became God!
5. Hold tight: here comes the uh-oh…it was theoretical. Immanuel Kant had insisted that science be based on empirical evidence. Instead…these ‘scientists’ had explained life on earth using a hypothetical construct that does not exist!!! No healthy, self-regulating ‘balanced ecosystem’ has ever been found!
a. “What we call …an ecosystem is often a fiction, an arbitrary restriction of spatial boundaries, rather than a reflection…of species change.”
Simon Levin, Professor of Biology, Princeton, “Fragile Dominion: Complexity and the Commons,” p.71 (1999).
b. “The concept of ‘The Balance of Nature,” so politically successful in the 1960’s and 1970’s, has been dismissed by ecological science….Unfortunately, however, many of the laws designed to regulate ecological resources were passed when “The Balance of Nature” paradigm was king….” http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=delpf
c. “Sixty years after the ecosystem idea surfaced in the scientific literature; after decades of dominance on university campuses; after thousands of books, articles, conferences, and monographs; scholars cannot agree on the most fundamental matters regarding ecosystems. They do not agree on what constitutes the core characteristics of ecosystems. They cannot say where ecosystems begin or end in space or time, or tell us when one ecosystem replaces another on the landscape.
They cannot agree on how to locate ecosystems. They offer no generally accepted definitions or measures of health, integrity, or sustainability. The state of the science concerning the ecosystem notion and its attendant ideas provides little scientific justification for the radical change in public policy proposed by the Clinton administration.” Ecosystem Management: | PERC Fitzsimmons, Allan K. 1999. Defending Illusions: Federal Protection of Ecosystems. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
6. The idea of environmentalism is not science, it is political. Once the uninformed can be made to accept the unproven bogus concepts, biology is a religion. The concepts are designed to trump individuals and individual rights. It is a wonderful tool for the eco-fascist.
Now listen for the squealing of the stuck pigs....who never realized that the fabrications of environmentalism were merely an excuse to demand control over everyone and everything.
Last edited:
