Are They Non-Earthlings Among Us?
Came across this article by Noam Mohr :How Environmentalists are Overlooking Vegetarianism as the Most Effective Tool Against Climate Change in Our Lifetimes. Please find time to read through it. In the meantime, check out the following recommendations from the article:
• Organizations should consider advocating vegetarianism as a major part of their anti-global warming campaigns. At a minimum, environmental advocates should mention vegetarianism in any information about actions individuals can take to address global warming.
• Government policy should encourage vegetarian diets. Possible mechanisms include an environmental tax on meat similar to one already recommended on gasoline, a shift in farm subsidies to encourage plant agriculture over animal agriculture, or an increased emphasis on vegetarian foods in government-run programs like the school lunch program or food stamps.
Singapore's Health Promotion Board recently started a campaign to encourage the public to eat more healthily by recommending a certain portion of vegetables and fruits as part of one's meal. Although the direction was more health-based than environment-based, it helps to some extent at least.
Well, pig farming was phased out since 1987 in Singapore, due to limited land and water resources. Although pollution was also one of the concerns, I feel that wasn't the main motive at all, or was it? Nonetheless, am glad that Singapore had finally ratificated/accepted* the Kyoto Protocol on 12 April 2006.
From many articles that I read, not many countries are always willing to put their economies at risk by promoting environmental-friendly ways of living. Just how unbeneficial can it be to be environmental-friendly? Is it more wise or beneficial to destroy the Earth that one lives in? I find rationalisations against environmentalism rather peculiar. To be fair, maybe they don't know the Earth is not as invincible as they thought it to be. But it becomes unforgivable when much research and recent extreme weather conditions already indicate otherwise. Is the meat industry more profitable than the agricultural industry? But how could it be so when many resources are lost during the process of producing a certain amount of meat a day. (Please read my past post: Meat-eating is Harzardous To The Earth. There's no need to be a mathematician to do simple calculation to see the vast contrasts.
Greed, ignorance or plain denial reached a point beyond logic when the Bush and Blair administration outright ignored the signs and warnings of global warming and decide to continue feeding the Earth with unrationed toxins. America never signed or ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and Blair recently backed nuclear plans. Are they even Earthlings, I wonder.
Here's a list of environment-related articles at the EarthSave website.
*Note: According to Wikipedia, signing of the Kyoto Protocol is optional, indicating intention to ratify. Ratification is the key step for a country to formally accept an international treaty.