Modern Civil Disobedience - Tim DeChristopher

> 1. He misrepresented himself by saying that he was a legitimate buyer for the drilling rights.

"The entire basis for the false statements charge that I was convicted of was the fact that I wrote my real name and address on a form that included the words “bona fide bidder.” When I sat there on the witness stand, Mr Romney asked me if I ever had any intention of being a bona fide bidder. I responded by asking Mr Romney to clarify what “bona fide bidder” meant in this context. Mr Romney then withdrew the question and moved on to the next subject. On that right there is the entire basis for the government’s repeated attacks on my integrity."

> 2. He was unable to pay for the bids he won.

"The other number suggested in the government’s memorandum is the $166,000 that was the total price of the three parcels I won which were not invalidated. Strangely, the government wants me to pay for these parcels, but has never offered to actually give them to me. When I offered the BLM the money a couple weeks after the auction, they refused to take it."

> If he's serious about this being a case of civil disobedience, he should accept the consequences of his actions. Trying to avoid the consequences just defeats the entire purpose.

"Despite my strong disagreements with the court about the Constitutional basis for the limits on my defense, while I was in this courtroom I respected the authority of the court. [...] disagreement with the law should not be confused with disrespect for the law."

It's really a very good speech, you should read it in its entirety.

If anything, significantly reducing Earth's capacity to sustain humans may paradoxically result in diminished total human suffering (average suffering x number of humans) due to lower population.

For what it's worth I do care, courtesy to my overly empathetic neural wiring. I'd argue that I am doing a lot more than my peers to reduce future human suffering simply by not contributing to the overpopulation. Not that any of it matters in the grand scheme of things ;)

Keep fighting the good fight, I admire your zeal!

This premise assumes that in the situation where we "don't make it," the total amount of suffering by the end of the human race would be more than one in where we "do make it." Given that human suffering is caused by everything, I would say that if the race were to survive, there would be infinitely more suffering because we would have more time to inflict it. The premise seems to take for granted that the only way humans suffer is through harming our environment, which is of course not at all accurate. The only way to avoid human suffering is to immediately get rid of all humans; being in favor of existence, I have to argue that this is a fruitless position.

Likewise, if animals can suffer, then the existence of animals causes suffering. Animals attack each other, eat each other, steal each others' food source and offspring. The only way to prevent animal suffering is to have no animals. If plants can suffer, then the existence of plants causes suffering as they compete for sunlight and nutrients and the 'losers' wither and die.

I suppose my point is: any argument that involves potential existence causing suffering must ultimately come to these conclusions. I don't believe there is any other choice. Plants will never stop competing, animals will never stop competing, and humans will never stop competing.

Also, if the crux of your argument is avoidable human suffering, then I would be very interested to know what defines unavoidable human suffering.

[Just enjoying my Saturday morning by carrying out some debate]

One can be or be not. Talk is bullcrap. "Environmentalism" is about talk and politics and taking control away from people and their lives, and it's about making money. It's not about reducing consumption and waste. Not at all.

You also bring up PeTA. Let's instead talk about the label "Animal Rights Activist". I am opposed to factory farms and slaughterhouses where animals are abused and tortured for profit. I'd like to see all of these either reformed or shut down. The abuse of animals is so severe that I consider it completely unethical to eat products from these places. As a result, since I am a omnivore and veganism made me sick, I have to raise and hunt my own meat because that I have control over and can do so in as ethical and humane a manner as possible. Yes it involves killing but I do so with respect for the animal and its life. Those I raise have a good life before slaughter. I would much rather just buy humanely raised meat, that would be less trouble, but it's not possible in the US. Few others do this, that is their own business. But am I an "Animal Rights Activist"? Absolutely not. That is a label of cranks who do things like set fire to cars and destroy perfectly good fur coats. PeTA kills 85% of the animals it rescues. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/04/27/peta-and-eu...)

Likewise with consumption. Wow it would be nice to drive around and fly and use air conditioning. Does your place of work have air conditioning? Mine does not because I choose not do do so because it is wasteful compared to a fan. Do you drive to work every day? I don't because it is outrageous to think that personal gas combustion vehicles is sustainable, and electric hybrids with their batteries are even worse. Do you raise most of your own food? I do. Screw the environmentalists, driving from meeting to meeting in their gas guzzling leaded gasoline running VW busses, and their private jets, and their olympic sized heated swimming pools, their destruction of the soil with their ethanol gas, their wasteful solar panels, and their refusal to get control over their own waste while they dare to dictate to others. The world would be better off without any of those outrageous hypocrites. The term "Environmentalist" has become an insult thanks to their efforts.

Among these is Suzuki, a major leader of outrageous hypocrites. Rather than address his own wasteful consumption, he buys religious indulgences in the form of carbon credits to "offset" his waste. This is complete nonsense and those who participate in these scams are either deluded followers, or cult leaders trying to confuse their followers by example.