I'd like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species, and I realised that humans are not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment; but you humans do not. Instead you multiply, and multiply, until every resource is consumed. The only way for you to survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern... a virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer on this planet, you are a plague.Agent Smith,
The Matrix
Even though I'm such a massive Keanufan, I never really got all that into The Matrix. Probably because I rooted for the other guy. I think Agent Smith is totally right. We suck. The world would be infinitely better off without us. >:-(
Post inspired, if that's the word I want, by
this tragic and infuriating news.
Posts
2 comments:
Better for whom?
For almost every other species that is forced to share this planet with us. I'd say 99,99999% of them.
The only ones who would suffer are the following three groups: first, the bacteria that live in symbiosis with us, in our digestive systems and whatnot. But there are a lot of bacteria in the world. Second, the relatively few species of virus, insects and worms that live as parasites and use us as their hosts. But again, there are many such creatures, and not all of those to which we are host animals are limited to only us as their hosts. Third, there are some animals that were once able to live independently, but have now become dependent on us for their survival. Some breeds of dogs, sheep, cattle, horses, poultry, rodents. These would succumb quickly without human caregivers, which may perhaps seem sad.
But it's important that we realize that the reason they are so dependent upon us is that we have bred them so brutally as to make them unfit for anything other than precisely such a life. A breed standard English bulldog, for instance, will die during labor because the puppies' heads are too large to pass through her birth canal. This is yet another example of the human appetite for destruction that we can only hope will lead to our own extinction, or at least near-extinction, in the not too distant future.
But the material point here is that such an animal needs human caregivers because it has been bred to a point where it has become, quite simply, incompatible with sustained life in the longer term. So it's perfectly natural that these creatures die out.
And again, these are a tiny minority among all the world's species, and none of them are anything remotely like unique. It's not a tragedy if Canis vulgaris were to die out entirely - which I doubt it would, in any case - Canis lupus would thrive.
Despite this lengthy answer, I assume your question is rhetorical. I don't actually think that anyone so ignorant as to seriously pose such a question would be reading this blog. I may be wrong, of course. But I really do think the answer is obvious. But I was in the mood to clarify this, I've been thinking a lot about it lately.
You may of course also be one of those people who consider our species inherently more valuable than any other species, and entitled to dominion over the planet, so to speak. If that is the case I can tell you right now that we will never agree.
Post a Comment