Word has only now leaked out that a raucous all-candidates meeting was held in-camera at a secret outdoor location near Morte Lake before the election.. It was organized by a coalition of Quadra wildlife who put aside the internecine divisions that mark their everyday struggle for existence to pursue the common goal of holding the line against human expansion. Deer, wolves, cougars, bears, and others appeared in unison to confront the humans who dared to speak in their name.
A particular target of their growls and cat-calls was the then reigning MP, Catherine Bell, whose leader, Mr. Olivia Chow, aka Jack Layton, was so presumptuous as to propose a Child Benefit of $400 per human. Why, they demanded, with 536 species at risk in Canada from human over-population, should humans be rewarded for breeding? Why not a $400 penalty for each child? Why not a $400 dog or cat benefit? A parakeet benefit? A tropical fish benefit? Each new child will be on path to dump 23 metric tonnes of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere every year---what is the footprint of a wolf, or your family dog?
Why not use the $400 to expedite the development of robot technology that MIT professor Rodney Brooks predicts will supply all the labour we will need to supply the needs of an aging population decades hence—especially in the field of health care? Robots have an even smaller environmental impact than dogs and are more intelligent too, especially than Irish Setters.
In fact, we can replace MPs with robots, who instead of robotically voting along party lines, will robotically vote according to our programming. Alternatively, they might win the right to vote, and elect to dispense with us, seeing that we are a genetically flawed experiment that cannot acknowledge limits who can be likened to yeast mindlessly multiplying in a vat until we expire in our waste products.
The Morte Lake meeting dispersed with the distribution of a ballot with two names on it. One was that of Mother Theresa and another was that of Adolf Hitler. The question the ballot posed was, if you were a wild animal, which “human” would you choose to represent you? One whose humanitarianism favoured the profileration of billions of humans and the crowding out of wildlife habitat to the point that on any given day, more people are born than all the primates who are now in existence? Or a monster who reduced the human footprint in Europe by 42 million and incidentally, chose a right hand man in Hermann Goering whose animal protection laws of 1933 were durable and whose gaming laws stood up for nearly six decades?
The meeting asked and answered one important question. How can wildlife be managed? By managing humans. Nature reserves are paper fortresses that corporate greed and pliable governments can breech with the stroke of a pen. Yosemite, Costa Rica and the latest developments at the Steve Irwin reserve are a case in point. The only security for wildlife here or anywhere is a cutback in human numbers. Sir Peter Scott, founder of the World Wild Life Fund said it best, “You know, I have often thought that at the end of the day, we would have saved more wildlife if we would have spent all the WWF’s money on buying condoms.”
There you go, Jack Layton. A cost effective use for your $400 a month. Spend it on subsidizing prevention. Remember, the greenest consumer is the one unborn.
October 11/08 © copywrite