75. DOOMER TYPE #1: THE SOCIAL DARWINIST

There's lots of these critters running loose in the "peak oil community". To illustrate, I have chosen Jack, one of the moderators at peakoil.com -- a website which serves as Peak Oil 101 for thousands of people everyday. Jack is an affected little worm who brags about his net worth and luxurious life, and has a Marie Antoinette style take on peak oil. He's been involved in peak oil longer than I have, and is familiar with all the key peak oil sources (ASPO, Savinar, Simmons, "The Oil We Eat", dieoff.org etc.) He's even developed a manifesto of sorts, explaining how he thinks we should deal with peak oil. I'll let him speak in his own words:

The End of Cornucopian Idealism
Are you a cornucopian? Perhaps you walk or bicycle whenever possible, wear warm clothing instead of using heating oil, and seek voluntary simplicity in every aspect of your life. You may not even own a television, an SUV, or a dishwashing machine. And yet, you may be every bit as much of a cornucopian as someone who drives a bright yellow Hummer2, keeps the thermostat at 80 in the winter and 72 in summer, and who personally keeps the mall merchants fiscally healthy. Attitude defines the cornucopian.

What, then, is a cornucopian? It is a person who believes in ever-growing, ever-lasting, ever-bountiful abundance. It is a person who cannot conceive of shortage, of limitation, or of want.

[...]

A cornucopian refuses to grasp a fundamental truth; that there is only so much of any particular thing. The food you give to another is food you no longer have. That mouthful might be the critical resource required for your own survival. The blanket you provide to someone else may be the very item you need to avoid freezing to death. Foreign aid is merely the collective version of the cornucopian ideal. A nation that gives away resources deprives itself on behalf of others. In a world of limits, this is tantamount to societal suicide.

Within our little community, many argue that nations should help each other, cooperate, and share what is available. It is an argument that ignores harsh realities. If resources exist such that two may live, dividing them among five determines that all will perish. Limitless abundance does not define our world. No, the lack of resources defines our lives. Two thirds of the Earth’s population – some four billion people – cannot be supported by existing resources. Moreover, the surplus population may be far larger – and the problem far greater. The fundamental reality is that more than two thirds of the people alive today cannot be fed, clothed, warmed, or maintained. Over the next 30 years, billions are likely to die. Our actions will decide who will be among their number.

Nations must recognize their duty to their own citizens. They must gain what resources are available, by whatever means are at hand. Supplies must be defended zealously against any who would take them. The weak will perish. Those who are to survive must accept this reality; those who refuse the dictates of reality will remove themselves from the equation.

We have the clear vision to recognize the likely shape of upcoming events. We must now attend to our thinking and embrace truth. For the most part, we are all part of the developed world. We have computers, electricity, running water, and adequate food. The third world cannot be saved. The best and kindest act is to let it sink beneath the seas and cease prolonging their pain. For our own survival, we must be prepared to take their resources for our own use. It is brutal. It is also the refutation of cornucopian idealism. Compassion is a luxury we cannot afford.

Abandon the mirage of limitless resources. Gather what you may, and hold it. For those resources are life itself.Source

Jack knows all about peak oil, and guess what? He doesn't give a shit about conservation. He brags about how much fuel he uses:

For myself, I drive a car that gets just under 20 MPG...if I'm going downhill...with a tailwind. I regularly eat pineapple flown in from Hawaii, strawberries from Mexico, and the rest of the stuff from who-knows-where. No one bothers to bring these matters up, because they recognize that I don't particularly care what they think.Source

So there you go. Case study #1 of what "getting the message out" does to people. How many more Jacks do you "peak oil activists" plan on creating with your ill-conceived "message"? Enough to win an election?