- 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.”



Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide