05 June 2008

On Being an Environmental(ist) Pig

State-sponsored environmentalist indoctrination has publicly reached a new low in Australia. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has put up a site called “Planet Slayer” which is intended for children. Interestingly, the page is listed in the “science” section of the ABC website.

The most reported (on Fox News’ Special Report and Boortz’s site) section of the site asks the web-browsing public to “Use our greenhouse calculator to find out when you should die!” (my emphasis). The calculator uses a pig graphic to demonstrate where the tester rates on the scale. If a person takes this test and does not own or use a car, eat meat, live alone, or spend money, then perhaps he could live a long, green life, according to the website. I should have died, according to the website, at 1.5 years of age. Apparently because I bought a house and a car over the past year, I’ve damaged the environment in sundry ways and ought to have spared the planet my existence not long after birth. Indeed, my mother should have seen this coming and…done the right thing for the planet.

If the “Planet Slayer” website doesn’t seem anti-human, perhaps I’m beating my head against the wall. Of course, the designers of the site may defend themselves by saying that children love hyperbole, and this is why the site uses such shocking ideas as “you should [have died] at age 1.5.”

All that aside, here’s an interesting, underlying concept being pushed on the test page. Question 11 of the test is a sliding bar for spending habits. If what the website considers an average person tithes just 47% of his income to “stuff that’s better for the environment” and “ethical investments,” then that person is environmentally acceptable and may live until the age of 77. No tithing? Then he ought to have died at age 9.3.

So, it really is all about the money. Money spent in certain ways is classified as evil, planet-hating and ultimately self-destructive. Money spent in other ways – ways which enrich the high church of Global Warming / Climate Change – will lead to longer life. It’s not eternal bliss in the light of God, but it’s a start.

There are more indoctrination fun and games on the ABC site – some of which are contradictory. For instance, beer drinkers are mocked in one section, but at least drinking beer is more environmentally sound than drinking wine. The “This is Your Lifestyle” section asks the viewer to “See how much you suck.” But the first question about buying a new car or keeping an old one offers no better choice, only bad and worse. Buying shirts offers the same bad choices. One wonders where the big-picture logic is in the website's line of thinking. Of course, there really isn't one. "Save the planet" means doing and believing what environmentalists say when they say it. And surely there's nothing political about that, right?

And, I’m sure the ABC does not intend to feature images of Che Guevara for any specific reason. It’s more of a fashion thing, like the anti-Bush costume in one section. There’s nothing political about those things…right?

What is obvious is that the creators of “Planet Slayer” push a specific lifestyle – I’ll call it an enviro-tithing, vegetarian, communal living, anti-capitalist lifestyle. They do so by using tactics that are questionable at best, especially because they are targeting young viewers. While such tactics are easily transparent to older, more sensible viewers, they are probably not so to the young. That this is government sponsored (the ABC is somewhat like the BBC, if I’m not mistaken) is troubling. It makes me wonder if PBS has the same drivel out there on its website.

No comments: