- The Washington Times - Friday, August 21, 2009


Your editorial on John P. Holdren, director of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, stressed his anti-life views related to the debate over health care, but it ignored his views on environmental issues related to the debate over anti-growth cap-and-trade legislation (“Obama’s mad science adviser,” Opinion, Sunday).

Mr. Holdren has argued in the past for the “de-development” of the United States, believing the country is “overdeveloped.” In the 1973 book “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” co-authored with Paul R. and Anne H. Ehrlich, he wrote, “The need for de-development presents our economists with a major challenge. They must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one.” The three environmentalists argued, “The most critical change of all must be a change in goals; all people, rich and poor alike, must come to recognize that being a citizen of a giant, smoggy, freeway-strangled industrial state is not necessary to being a happy, healthy, fulfilled human being.” This is a concise statement of the core green worldview of blissful poverty and stagnation.

Mr. Holdren, in both health care and economics, favors a return to the state of nature, where, as Thomas Hobbes noted, life is “nasty, brutish and short.”





Click to Read More

Click to Hide