: I don't think your nuts for advocating a position based on rationalism and research based conclusions. This has been the basis of all the huge advances in mankinds history, not only technological but spiritual and moral.
Rational decision-making has also been used to justify the worst sorts of exploitation and imperialism, e.g., dark-skinned Africans are inferior to whites, so we may enslave them. In other words, what's rational is often relative. As for employing rationalism to develop spirituality, which is inherently irrational -- that makes as little sense as the rest of your inane post, which I'll continue to rip apart...
:[snipping obvious point that some scientists work to please their paymasters]
: The dive into simple emotionalism, romanticism and the elevation of 'Earth' over the human remains a key feature of the Nazi movement, who as Vegans, Ecologists,animal rights activists and worshippers of the 'Earth-Mother' Gaia also happened to be Genocidists and evil bastards of a major order.
The only thing simple here is you. Equating Nazis with vegans and animal rights activists is a smear worthy of Joseph Goebbels himself. First off, Hitler was not a vegetarian (much less a vegan). Secondly, animal rights activists believe in rights for all animals, including humans, and you'll find that many animal rights activists, such as my wife and myself, are active human rights activists. In fact, I'll bet that animal rights activists are far more active in the human rights movement than the typical American who chows down on hamburgers, watches sitcoms on TV, and doesn't get involved in anything more controversial than arguments over who's going to win the Superbowl.
While the Nazis may have worshipped nature as a means to justify their particularly twisted brand of social darwinism, this does not therefore mean that anyone who is a green, ecologically-minded, or even a Wiccan/Gaia worshipper is therefore a Nazi. The Nazis also highly valued physical fitness -- I suppose that means that Richard Simmons is a goose-stepping fascist then, right? Utterly ridiculous, but again, a smear worthy of Goebbels.
:The fluffy 'bunny hugger' image of the green activist of nowadays
An image cultivated by anti-environmentalists to downplay the seriousness of both environmentalists and their issues...
:belies that fact that there is nothing inevitably in the notions of ecology that directs it towards a social conscience.
Ecology is a branch of science devoted to studying the interrelationship between organisms (including man) and their environment. It's findings can be used for good or ill; environmentalists, however, are people devoted to using the findings of ecologists to protect and preserve nature.
That is the political context in which such ideas are interpreted. Your average Green activist of today is just as likely to support crappy Malthusian ideas and use this to justify destruction of a part of the Human race- they are as likely to be some Right-wing idiot as they are some left-wing structural analyst.
Thanks for telling us all what your opinion of the "average" green activist is. Try backing that opinion up with some solid evidence if you wish that opinion to be taken seriously.
:just go and check out the crass emotionalism and genocidal hatred of the 'Deep-ecology' movement or the activities of Nazi groups in Europe.
I love when people like yourself downplay emotions as somehow inferior to cold, supposedly unemotional reasoning. Emotions are as valid as science in directing human behavior. And while many deep-ecologists spout misanthropic views (and though I'm not a deep ecologist, engaging in periodic misanthropic rants is a favorite hobby of mine), don't blithely assume that such talk is to be taken literally; it's often used for exxageration, humor, or venting steam (I've no doubt that there are sincerely genocidal deep ecologists and animal rights activists, but I truly doubt they are anything but a small minority. Furthermore, advocating a peaceful, voluntary reduction in the human population for the sake of both the planet and ourselves, as I do, can hardly be called genocidal; if anything, it's a way to ensure the perpetuation of the human race).
Instead of engaging in crude smears, try debating environmental and animal rights issues on their merits.