New York Times Makes Case for Human Extinction

The bad news is that the chin-pulling wisemen at the New York Times, flagship publication of the liberal elite intelligentsia, think the global warming hoax could cause human extinction. The good news is that according them, that may not be a bad thing.

The Times advances its nihilistic ideology by providing a soapbox to Clemson University philosophy professor Todd May, who wags a stern finger of rebuke at the human race:

Human beings are destroying large parts of the inhabitable earth and causing unimaginable suffering to many of the animals that inhabit it.

We are allegedly accomplishing this horror through anthropogenic climate change (which if there even is such a thing would result in more animals by making more of the earth warm enough for life to flourish), by “encroaching on ecosystems,” and by farming (which oppresses chickens and so forth).

Humanity, then, is the source of devastation of the lives of conscious animals on a scale that is difficult to comprehend.

Stand by for moonbattery on a scale far more difficult to comprehend.

You may ask, don’t animals risk getting eating by other animals even if people don’t eat them? The answer:

[T]here is no other creature in nature whose predatory behavior is remotely as deep or as widespread as the behavior we display toward [animals].

The occasional tiger will kill some other animal and eat it, but normally animals in the wild play together amicably and consume a vegan diet. Or at least, that’s what ivory tower moonbats appear to believe.

Another possible objection to human extermination:

Doesn’t the existence of [the arts and sciences] outweigh the harm we bring to the environment and the animals within it?

The nutty professor counters the question with another:

How many human lives would it be worth sacrificing to preserve the existence of Shakespeare’s works?

May proclaims the correct answer to be zero. Since we are expected to regard people as no more valuable than animals, it follows that Shakespeare’s works are not worth stepping on a cockroach.

There is just too much torment wreaked upon too many animals and too certain a prospect that this is going to continue and probably increase; it would overwhelm anything we might place on the other side of the ledger.

It stands to reason that the human race should just die.

We encounter liberals every day, most of whom are perfectly normal people. It is easy to forget that their ideology is not merely foolish and nauseating, but wicked and insane.

Communists, Nazis, and Muslims have inflicted vast death and suffering in the name of ideologies that are downright benevolent by comparison. Applied moonbattery would lead to the evilest end conceivable: human extinction.

On a tip from Eddie_Valiant.

The post New York Times Makes Case for Human Extinction appeared first on Moonbattery.