Eco-mentalists And Luxury...

As the population of China becomes more wealthy, the demand for luxury products is booming. This of course is good news to the luxury houses of France and Italy. But in the general scheme of things, the environmentalists say it is rather the contrary.

Now the eco-mentalists-(you know those lunatics that are in the business of scare-mongering by preaching the end of the world and the death of Polar bears in the Arctic) will say that, 'this is bad for the environment!' all the while flying in private jets to environment summits in Canada and Malaysia.

These 'Earth-Watchers' will tell you not to buy Loro Piana products because they use Vicuna from goats in South America that are near extinction. I would rather much listen to Rush Limbaugh-(another crazed lunatic American political commentator. I cannot make out which is worse) than pay any attention to Al Gore and his disciples.

Manufacturing luxury products takes immense skill, resources and energy not to mention the aeroplanes, ships and trucks that are required to distribute these products all over the world. As a result we've been told, for about the hundreth time, that if nothing is done extinction looms.

Yes, say the conservationists, who argue that unless something is done now the future generation will grow up never being able to see a tiger in the wild. And this is very sad.

Is it? I have never seen any number of creatures that I know to exist. So why should I care if my nephews and nieces never see a tiger?

There's an awful lot of sentimantality around the concept of extinction. We have a sense that when a species dies out we should all fall to our knees and spend sometime wailing.

But why? Apart from a few wealthy Chinamen, or if you want a nice coat, it makes not the slightest bit of difference if the tiger dies out. It will not upset our power suppiles or heal the American rift with Iran. It is as irrelevant as the death of a faraway star.

So far this century we've waved goodbye to the Pyrenean ibex - did you notice? - and the red Colobus monkey. The fact is species are managing to die off all in their own. The brontosaurus for example. And who honestly thinks it's sad that their children will never get to see a Tyrannosaurus rex in the wild?

In the nineteenth century 27 species went west, including the great Auk, the thick tail chub, the quagga, the Cape lion and many more. Apparently, all efforts were made to save some but it was no good.

Eco-mentalists ignore the fact that between 1900 and 1919 many young men in Europe were lost and they prattle on about the passing of the passenger pigeon, the siberian tiger and the Morrocan crocodile-which by the way makes the most exquisite of bags ans shoes.

Honestly, who cares, there are quite literally millions more species in the sea. In 2007 we heard that scientists in the South American rainforest found 24 previously unknown species. They may not be as cuddly as a baby tiger, but come on, give me a break.

So is the world rejoicing at the sensational news that we've been joined on earth by more species? Is it hell as like. What the world is doing instead is crying into its eco-handkerchief because of what's going on in the Arctic.

If the polar bear dies out it will not make a jot of difference to you or anyone you've ever met. The only people who'll even notice are the Inuits, and its passing will actually improve their lives because thay will be able to go on about their lives without the risk of being eaten to death.

I do not believe the we should deliberately and maliciouly kill stuff in huge numbers just to meet the ever increasing demand for luxury products coming from the far east, but it should be done in a responsible and manageable way. Unless of course it's a virus or a mosquito. But I do wish the world's conservationists would learn a lesson from some of the enlightened species in the animal kingdom: that when push come to shove in business, the only creatures that really matter are those in our social group. And shareholders.