Nuclear Power

The past couple of days we've been waiting in a Cold War-esque state of panic, refreshing news websites for word on just how bad the radiation leak in Japan is following an 8.9 magnitude Earthquake and massive tsunami which cut power to the cooling systems of "state of the art" nuclear power plants.

People are googling for worst-case scenario nuclear fallout maps, ordering up potassium iodide pills and gas masks. You name it. Yesterday the roof of the emergency radiation containment building blew sky high and the general climate of the Japanese government has been "We meant do to that!".

There are 'liberals' out and about who, since yesterday of course, swear their ideology has opposed nuclear power from day one. This just isn't the case. Even Obama has repeatedly called for the construction of new nuclear reactors since being elected president.

When the oil spill in the gulf took place, it was very stylish among liberal environmentalists to scold "reckless, impulsive support for offshore drilling" and praise futuristic, advanced solutions like nuclear power plants.

Lets not even talk about the ridiculous concept of maintaining our current power consumptions via solar panels and windmills. Come on. Put down the joint.

Why is the supposedly pro-environment left so ridiculously inconsistent and devoid of a plan? Simple. Political correctness.

The only way we could ever maintain civilizations equipt with modern medicine and transportation without exponentially increasing dependency on nuclear power is by having fewer children until the population no longer massively exceeded the providing capacity of solar/wind.

It's no big secret among environmentalists that the native populations of first-world nations are already shrinking and the noose of environmental laws already tightening around oversized economies. Dandy!

The problem is that between third-world overpopulation and immigration, overall consumption is still sky rocketing, and faster than ever before.

For a liberal to talk about overpopulation inevitably results in the re-examination of some of the most fundamental pillars of the hippie movement: Globalism, open borders, promiscuous sex and reckless reproduction. They'll have to talk about the extreme gaps in birthrates between Mexican Americans and other Americans. They'll have to talk about the ultimate taboo: Africa. While this may be useful raw data to a scientist, to the average TV-raised American, it's "Nazi eugenics" and whatnot.

Suddenly the trendy pseudo-environmentalist is no longer distantly ranting about solar panels and windmills and receiving grins of pity from pedestrians. He's talking about building a Great Wall of America on the southern border, he's talking about teaching kids abstinence, he's talking about mass birth control for Africa and South America. He's offending immigrant/youth demographics he's spent his life pandering to and he's socially alienated from his friends. He's talking like a right-winger, a party pooper. He's raining on the parade.

You may be saying "What, moron? Japan doesn't even have a growing population!"

Even in Japan, a country which has gone to great lengths to maintain lower levels of immigration and ethnic diversity than the chaotic US, industrial growth thrives on exports and services catering to growing populations. Japan, with Germany, maintains one of the highest GDP vs population ratios in the world because it essentially sells tools to countries with lower GDP vs population ratios and massive birthrates. The US would be similar, except that it's artifically swollen it's domestic population via illegal immigration. Which typical liberal environmentalist is going to stand up and identify global population growth as the problem, is going to factually state that Japan's export economy is freakishly, unnaturally large? None. They'd rather accuse atomic physics itself of being at fault. To laymen, they look like the intelligent hero. They're happy.

Sometimes nature reminds us it exists and overpopulation is a bad idea quite blatantly (Indonesian tsunami) and other times by way of destroying extremely dangerous technologies a world with a smaller population would lack the demand for (Chernobyl to feed the population growth of the USSR, Japan to feed the third largest industrial & export economy in the world).

Will the "liberal" piece of the environmentalist pie ever come clean about the root of the problem?

No. they will, instead, alternate between oil and nuclear depending on which one has exploded the least recently, then trail off mumbling something about windmills. What we have on our hands is a trendy fashion statement/sub-culture posing as a political ideology.