My least favorite people are ignorant "green" types who implicitly support killing poors to protect ecosystems.
That position is not necessarily based on ignorance. Wildlife has been halved in the last 40 years and will continue to decrease until population growth is stabilized (and we hopefully find less resource consuming ways to life).
You may be an anthropocentric fundi and think human life is always more valuable than other types of life, but valuing biodiversity is not based on ignorance, just different values than yours.
Even if you are not preferred to commit suicide to make room for biodiversity (few people are) it is not necessarily hypocrisy to want to limit the size of the human population to protect other species, if you keep your own reproduction low.
I agree that it can often seen as "poors have to go", but poor people gets more children and it important to limit their reproduction as well if you want an ecologically and diverse world with a bit of wilderness left for coming generations to enjoy.
Humans are wonderful and creative beings, but lets face it: We are also a pest, that needs to be kept in check, and we only have ourselves to do it.
Im sorry but you advocate eating their children by forcibly preventing poor people from having kids and then eating the extra food yourself (while giving some to the poor polar bears!)
This, to me, is the quintessence of Nazism. The "master race" argument didn't work so "master gardener" will have to suffice...and you're ready to spray pesticide all over.
