Additional Titles


By Frederick Meekins
October 20, 2002

The acolytes of tolerance regularly charge that the policies advocated by contemporary Conservatism are designed to oppress minorities and hinder the development of less-advanced societies. But whereas true Conservatives endeavor to maximize the potential for individual achievement within the framework of a universal set of values, the assorted manifestations of the Left possess no goal other than the total regimentation of both society and the life of the individual.

The United Nation’s Earth Summit convened in South Africa to discuss matters of sustainable development and environmental policy. Those supporting the meeting, though they would not admit it, were as racist as a Klan rally and as inimical to human liberty as the Soviet Communist Party.

Critics would no doubt dismiss this characterization as overwrought hyperbole. A closer examination of the assumptions embraced by those standing in support of Earth Summitry might make my initial assertion look like an understatement.

Most Americans realize that modern utilities such as electric lights and indoor plumbing have been indispensable blessings in objectively raising the standard of living for all who partake of them by increasing sanitary conditions and for decreasing the need for excessively arduous labor. The American people are possessed of such beneficent character that they would not mind seeing these technologies spread throughout the backwards parts of the earth. In fact, such development serves as the impetus for much secular and religious relief work.

However, a growing number of environmentalists think those living in these undesirable parts of the world ought to be denied these vital necessities. The reason: these devices are not only "ecologically questionable" but also "culturally disruptive". In other words, people living in such regions don’t deserve to have them.

This is because, as Gar Smith of the Earth Island Institute told, since the introduction of electricity African villagers have spent too much time watching television and listening to the radio in neglect of more traditional activities such as playing musical instruments.

Shaka and Moombassoo must not be banging their bongos anymore before having missionary stew like they use to.

Like all good communitarians, the environmentalists like nothing better than digging into their neighbor’s business. That is why steps must be taken to curb all individualist activities, be it watching TV in your mud hut in Africa or by mandating that houses be built with front porches instead of back decks in the United States.

Another activist was as vociferous in her lament of the flush toilet, the preferred method of waste disposal presumably being to dump the goods in the middle of the street. These fonts of scientific learning then sit back and wonder in amazement where all the flies come from that the natives refuse to swat away from their children for fear of striking great-grandma come back to life.

Hypertolerant multiculturalists will no doubt cringe at my characterization of Third World conditions. But isn’t their position taking it upon themselves to decide what’s in the best interest of these societies in terms of technological innovation regardless of what these people might want for themselves an even more offensive stance for those who have elevated the relativity of all cultures to the level of religious dogma?

A fundamental characteristic of socialism is that, in its attempts to spread equality, misery is the only thing that it spreads equally. The same is true of its derivative manifestations feigning concern for all things green and growing.

Most of those living in the U.S. won’t get worked up about denying Africans light bulbs and indoor plumbing; after all, those dwelling on the Dark Continent have been living like crud all along. Hopefully though American’s won’t be as lackadaisical when they learn of what’s planned for their liberties, leisures, and livelihoods as well.

Gar Smith of the Earth Island Institute rhetorically asks in his interview, "The real question is what personal conveniences ... are you willing to give up in order to stop destroying the planet?" Frankly, none whatsoever, especially in light of the extravagant opulence reveled in by delegates to this globalist confab.

Borrowing a page from their Soviet role models, these collectivists planned out futures of enforced deprivation while they themselves feasted on 5,000 oysters, 1,000 pounds of lobster, 80,000 bottles of mineral water, and copious amounts of caviar --- all paid for of course by the subjects of these respective nations admonished to subsist on the hunter/gather lifestyle of our supposed cave-dwelling ancestors.

According to the Sun of Great Britain, hundreds of trees were decimated around the conference center so limousines could arrive in style. Yet we are supposed to rely on public transportation, and in Hyattsville, Maryland residents are forbidden from felling their own trees without first obsequiously prostrating themselves before town officials. Al Gore complains about the propensity of Americans to consume an undue amount of the world’s resources but can no longer fit into his own wedding ring.

Often Conservatism is berated as an ideology for attempting to ground its ideals in how the world really works rather than how thinkers postulate it should be. But in embracing such sobering realism, at least it does not offer that which cannot be given or deny that which it has no right to take as is the nature of all things to the Left.

© 2002 Frederick Meekins - All Rights Reserved


Frederick Meekins is a student in the distance education program of Trinity Theological Seminiary pursuing an MA in Apologetics and Philosophy. He has published commentaries on websites such as WorthyNews.Com, The Freedom of Religion Coalition of Maryland, and the Christian Portal Homepage and in newspapers such as the Prince George's Journal.