Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 36, Number 9. 1ts May 1973
One Eye on Ecology
One Eye on Ecology
I would like to make some comment on David Tripe's article in "Salient" March 21, titled—Ecology Action: "Are they Wasting Their Energy".
From the beginning I must admit that I agree with his final conclusion, that environmental disruption is so engrained into our modern society that it will take a major change to solve it. However, I disagree with the possible change that he implies.
My interpretation of his article is that he blames the profit centred capitalists system for our ecological disruption and implies that a socialistic type organisation may be the answer. Once again his ideas are typical of the socialistic garbage that seem to influence the Salient breed. Here is a typical example of a person who looks at the world with one eye open—so typical of many of the movements of University today.
To help Mr Tripe open his other eye it may pay him to read about the ecological disruption in USSR and other socialistic countries. One book that springs to mind is Prof. Goldman's—"The Spoils of Progress", published in 1972. This will show very clearly what happens to the environment under state control. Why is it that so many critics have more faith in a state bureaucracy than the individual freedom of the people?
"Governments assuming a proper limitation of their activities are necessary and not evil. Their evil begins when they step out of bounds. The necessity is that the evil actions be discontinued". Frederick A. Hayek.
Because of the above reasoning I cannot agree with the ideas expressed by Ecology Action that the Values Party "has all the answers". After reading the party manifesto and listening to various speakers I am convinced that the party is full of contradictions and it will end up by being a party that spends most of its time chasing it's tail. How can you talk about individual freedom, liberty and new values on one hand and increased state intervention on the other even to the point of Nationalisation of land—state ownership again. The present example of the Labour Party and the freedom of the farmers over the Wool Marketing Corporation is a lucid example of the beginning of the state control over the freedom of the individuals and their produce.
In closing may I say that if I have misinterpreted your article Mr Tripe, I humbly apologise.