Comments on: The Neo-Luddites

By: Jonathan Dean

Jonathan Dean — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:55:56 +0000

While it is fun to take shots at the odd views of professors, we need to remember why society has given them the freedom to write what they believe. It is to avoid the danger of silening all Galileos, referred to by one of the writers, who state the unpopular. Whatever one writes in the accademy must be supported by both referrences and logical argument, however wrong the conclusions may turn out to be. So let us not laugh at the professors–let’s read what they wrote and show where they went wrong.

By: Kris

Kris — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:53:36 +0000

When I read or hear about the extreme environmentalists claim that the sky is falling, the earth is dying, and it’s all man’s fault, I often think of that old story about the three blind men and the elephant. Each of them felt a different part of the elephant, and imagined it as an entirely unique beast than each of the other two. We all can get immersed in our whereabouts to the point that we think the whole world must be like it. Anyone who is screaming about the damage man is doing to this planet, that it’s turning into one big landfill, and all animal and plant life is being exterminated, either hasn’t gotten out of the big city much, or is lying through their teeth in order to solicit support for their “cause” (which probably supports them financially). I’d tell the former to take a drive, take a trip, get out of the city. Go stand in the middle of Kansas or Nebraska, where there are few people. Take a deep breath, let it out, take a long look at the sky, and realize that nature is doing a very good job of taking care of itself. Take a drive into the Rocky Mountains of Wyoming or Montana, and then come back and tell us the world is dying. (But PLEASE don’t stay in those places! We don’t want you here.)
Disclaimer: I am not saying that mankind shouldn’t clean up after himself. We should most certainly do so: we have a moral obligation. But extreme environmentalist are going way too far.

By: Winston Smith

Winston Smith — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 03:30:22 +0000

Something about tending my garden today made me want to return to this piece. To what precisely do the Neo-Luddites seek to return? In a simple, neglected corner of my woodland garden toad lilies strain to outrun the wood ferns, clethra and joe-pye continue their invasion into each other’s space and the poor spicebush is left craning its branches for a hint of sunlight. Where would the garden be without the gardener? I neither made the plants nor make them grow; but I do offer nourishment and direction.

I suspect few Greens have spent as much time gardening and getting their hands dirty as they should; otherwise, the “Edenic” state would not seem so romantic.

By: Christian

Christian — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:45:24 +0000

Hi George, found your blog post by chance.I thought I noticed your name from an interview I might of heard with you on the Alex Jones weeks back-which if I recall, I enjoyed quite a bit.
You cover ‘many’ topics of my own personal interest in this piece, so it was easy to be drawn into this quick blog post of yours.
You seem to stand on both sides of the nature vs. human cunundrum, which I feel is the best place to stand if we remain pure mortal beings.
I do find your stance on genetically engineered seeds unclear, and wonder if you being the Chairman of Burpee seeds being a influecing factor…how could it not?. Im sure you are aware of the wonderful journalist F.William Engdahls work on the top hidden agendas of genetic engineering in the seed arenas. With this knowledge and more of whats available out there on this subject, dont you feel it is quite easy for humans to cross the rubicon sort of speak when mega corporations, and the military industrial complex as drivers in the future of the seed issue? Rarely is scientic motivation driven by altruistic ways these days.
Also, you should get your hands on the DVD called the ‘Net’, a brillant film by a german filmmaker combining IT, the Unabombers real background(CIA subject at Harvard,just prior to mid/late 60’s radical social/cultural experiments),the social engineering intent of the 50’s Macy Conferences, and origins of the computer world.As you are probably aware of-what is presented to us(the public) is rarely 10% of what is really intended by the world movers and shakers.
Extremism on either side of the spectum leads to fanatisism.Thanks for your post.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:23:45 +0000

Mr. Ball,

As a young gardner and reader of the WSJ, I found your this piece fascinating.

I am a third-year law student on the cusp of beginning to research and write a law review article. In choosing a topic, I have been contemplating the emerging movement of plant rights.

I am both fascinated and troubled by the philosophies and its’ implications for my generation. As I gather resources and perspectives, could you point me towards sources that have guided your views or would facilitate my research? I would be grateful.

By: Dale White

Dale White — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:51:07 +0000

Mr. Ball,

Thank you for a well-reasoned piece. But, “progressive-reactionaries”? No, sir, these people are called “nuts”.

By: Environmentalism – A Neo-Malthusian World View | Cincinnatus Blog /// Political Commentary, Social Commentary and Environmental Policy

Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:11:38 +0000

[...] In a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal by the horticulturist, George Ball, entitled Naturalism Has Been Hijacked – Man is not a cancer on the planet – the author pointed out [...]

By: AD

AD — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:43:11 +0000

“Progressive-Reactionaries”
In a Pre-Modern World, we mockingly pointed to such people, and mocked them as “Maroons”!

By: Gentle Miant

Gentle Miant — Sun, 31 May 2009 02:23:23 +0000

Hi Betty Stahl,
You make a good point regarding “professors of higher learning” (not a direct quote from your note). It is certainly true that being schooled in science does not necessarily make one a true scientist.

However, I hope that by “common sense”, you don’t mean “avoiding relevant information”. I’ve heard “global warming” referred to as a hoax before, and it boggles my mind that anyone could review what’s happening to the permafrost in Asia and North America, the glaciers in Iceland, and the icecaps in antarctica and still call global warming a hoax.

When I reed(sic) that, the only thing that I can think of is that the writer is avoiding unpleasant information or indulging in wishful thinking. I hope that in future you will research any subject of importance on which you make a statement as fact. If the masses have no knowledge of a real problem it may certainly be harder to solve.

As for your right to your opinion, I acknowledge that it could be that “your opinion is just as good as mine” (an expression I’ve had thrown at me on occasion). They are both totally worthless (and possibly harmful)… unless one or both lead to some truth.

By: Melanie

Melanie — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:21:55 +0000

What an interesting piece! Good job.

I was headed downstairs to liberate my sister-in-law’s “animal companions” when I thought better of it. She, after all, is quite the colonialist — in her own small way. She spends almost all her time, and much of her hard-earned money, treating them better than many young people are treated by their parents. And most of her sympathy is for animals of the four-legged variety.

That line about “euthanasia, abortion, suicide, and sodomy” as means toward population control was right on the money. Two states, if not three by now (one of them Montana), have made “suicide on demand” a legal reality. Abortion — especially partial-birth abortion — has made the womb the most dangerous place in America. Respect for and acceptance of sodomy and such relationships is going to taught by mandate (with no exceptions) to all students K – 5th grade in Alameda Co., California. Wow.

Our current lawmakers and activist judges (who believe they’ve been given the right to create laws by the Constitution — which isn’t exactly the case) are promoting all of these.

The Hippocratic Oath is dying a rapid death in America. I know others will chide me for my old-fashioned beliefs, that physicians should invest their energies in healing others — and not be forced by politicians who are trained primarily in the arts of argument and sophistry to turn their energies toward ending life and health.

Anyway — enjoyed the writing!

Thanks.