Its good to see you back...

... but so little has changed.

You are right, we are all familiar with the disdain and contempt that you continually show any concern anyone might have over any environmental or conservation issue. I am also familiar with the propensity you tend to show in assuming anything associated with "Earth" equals an environmental issue.

Regarding you last, I have to assume you are speaking of the Earth Charter that Gorby supports. The Earth Charter does contain conservation topics and agendas, but it is primarily an economic model designed to counter what Gorby (and many others) have determined to be the failed Washington Consensus... which is a model designed to show what guidelines and standards the US will support in developing countries.

Understand, I'm no fan of the Earth Charter. It smacks of centralized control of national and regional resource development and utilization... and that is a bad thing. In my opinion, it is utterly unsustainable, solely because of its grand scope. A country of a billion people (China or India) has less say about the use and development of resources than a country like Costa Rica, based only on the scale of consumption. I'm sure it fits nicely into what a former Communist would feel used to and comfortable with... but it can't ever work, for the same reasons communism can't ever work.

I'm also no fan of the Washington Consensus. Having a policy (stated or unstated) that says we support this sort of reform and organization, and then picking and choosing where and when such support will be applied is worse than meaningless... its a waste of time and money. The US will hold these standards and guidelines to the domestic agendas of states like Honduras, Mexico, Uganda, Liberia, and Ceylon... but will utterly ignore the violations of the same policies by nations like Pakistan, South Korea, South Africa and Brazil.

Supporters of the Earth Charter have no more right to dictate when, where or how a nation can use its own resources (fiscal, natural, environmental or otherwise... and that includes populations and demographics) than the US does to nations held to the yardstick of the Washington Consensus.

Both are meaningless and arbitrarily applied... so both are bad. However, the fact that it is a movement embraced by "green" supporters should be the LAST indicator of what is wrong with Earth Charter.