Concerns over the environment, climate change, indigenous peoples, and the future of humanity are increasingly a kind of collective hysteria that ignores rationality and justifies the most insane measures.
A few weeks ago, a group called “Individualistas tendiendo a lo salvaje” (Individualists Tending to the Wild) issued a statement on its website claiming responsibility for a bomb attack on Louis de Grange, president of Metro, the Santiago subway.
The group calls itself “eco-terrorist” and points out that the subway, “with its future projects and those already executed only manage to gnaw and destroy the earth even more, opening and tearing it apart in ever increasing kilometers.”
“With our attack we do not seek to end the Metro Company or force it to abandon its projects, which would be stupid and delusional. We only seek to honor the earth with explosions and blood.” This time [the target] was Metro’s top representative, yesterday was the turn of [mining company] Codelco, tomorrow it will be some other important executive,” says the text referring to previous attacks and announcing future ones.
Do not think that this is just an unimportant group that makes the news exclusively for its criminal attacks.
Four days before the attack, Alberto Curamil, environmental agitator from southern Chile, who is being held in a Temuco prison and is accused of violent robbery and attempted murder against police officers, was given the so-called “Green Nobel” prize award.
According to a press release, “The award was instituted in 1990 by philanthropists Richard N. Goldman (1920-2010) and Rhoda H. Goldman (1924-1996) to … show recognition to ordinary individuals who work to protect and improve the environment, and to inspire others to follow the example of the Prize winners.”
Those responsible for granting the prize were not unaware of Curamil’s status as a convict. On the contrary, “We have selected Alberto Curamil for the Prize because of his fierce leadership in forming coalitions and for his powerful defense to protect the Cautín River and the Mapuche territory. He has been a strong advocate for his people and for the land and rivers, and deserves the attention and respect of the international community,” said Ilan Kayatsky, Communications Director of the Environmental Prize.
This past week the historian and National History Prize Sergio Villalobos published in the daily El Mercurio a sensible letter on how artificial it is for the State to impose the use of the Mapuche language, gave rise to a heated debate. The left-wing congressman Crispi wrote: “Among other ways of referring to a complex ancestral language, the dungun, mapudungun, mapuzungun, chedungun is a living reflection of the Mapuche culture. In it, all the elements, traditions and rituals are interspersed. The connection with the ñuke mapu (mother earth) and the search for good living (küme-mongen) are just some of the ideas that can be seen in this language, so rich and profound that a univocal form of speaking or writing it does not even exist. “
In other words, for the congressman in question, the State must maintain the Mapuche language and all the others that he enumerates because they are related to the Mapuche religion. A curious argument from someone who certainly calls himself secular!
Running counter to this whole propaganda, the Center for Public Studies released a survey of Mapuches over 18 years of age living in the Araucanía area. It turns out that 94% of them prefer to have individual rather than community property deeds. “Of these, 83% declared that the violent actions of some groups to recover their lands are not legitimate, while 50% believe that the Mapuche have the right to sell their lands. Finally, only 2% consider it a priority to apply a law of indigenous quotas.”
On the subject of culture and identity, the same survey reports that: “of the total population surveyed, only 15% speak Mapudungun, while 85% do not. Likewise, 56% have not participated in any Mapuche ceremony during the last 12 months. Regarding religion, 39% of respondents declare themselves Catholic; 35%, Protestant or evangelical, and only 5% say they belong to a Mapuche spirituality.”
In a word, the supposedly interested parties are not interested in the hullaballoo organized in their name.
This week, far from Chile, Claire Nouvian, leader of France’s Place Publique ecological party, who also received the same International Goldman prize for the environment in 2018, declared on a well-known French TV program that global warming skeptics are “morons” who should not be given space in the media, and that the scientific community unanimously affirms the thesis of man-induced global warming. This gave rise to another heated debate about which some headlines read: “The ‘warming up’ is too hot to be entrusted to hysterical and religious ideologues.”
However, the most serious aspect of this panorama of ecological “dogmatism” was certainly the approval of the “Instrumentum Laboris” for the Next Synod on the Amazon, which also happened last week.
According to the press, “The Working Document is divided into three parts that address the following issues: the voice of the Amazon understood as listening to that territory, integral ecology, and the Church with an Amazonian face.”
In short, from being the most backward population in the world, the Amazonian Indians are supposed to become the model for the Church and the future of humanity.
This whole panorama of facts and statements in which half truths are mixed with dogmatic and hysterical irrationality, is intended to put civilization and progress on the defendant’s bench and take us back to the tribal “ideal” with its backwardness, superstitions, and paganism.