This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wow that was fast. Just hours!
Perhaps Plumbago can inform us why he removed mine and another's descriptions of Hardin's work in the Books section? He wrote in History:
"6 December 2010 Plumbago (10,470 bytes) (Partial revert to remove excessive commentary; moved some material from Books to other sections)"
No, Plumbago utterly removed them, then swiped one of my citations with reference and created an Awards section with that info, seemingly tossing the referenced he didn't like, including a ref/link to the entire Chapter 8 text.
Ideas, concepts, and arguments, in the form of books are Hardin's production. It's what he is. Without descriptions of them the article appears little different than a stub, dry and boring, if not misleading (as it appears to me). Furthermore, quotes and descriptions paint, in my opinion, a more accurate, full, and more three-dimensional picture than the gross oversimplifications otherwise presented here (as I had suggested). Obviously "excessive commentary" is not Dr. Plumbago's problem since he did not see fit to likewise butcher his buddy's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein.
Perhaps Plumbago can give a better description of his problem, or an actual constructive criticism so that we will be able to get Hardin's to more closely resemble Einstein's, to everybody's satisfaction? Or perhaps the actual problem is that Einstein's and others need mountains and mountains of excessive commentary likewise removed so as to be dry, concise, and equally boring?
I will wait a bit before undoing this vandalism, in hopes of finding mutual consensus.
No response required.
Doug Bashford-- 68.127.84.53 ( talk) 20:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
This is correct (I believe), but appears in the article to simply undermine the preceding text. Logically it does of course, but I've definitely read something (somewhere) by Hardin that picks up this particular thread, since he was certainly aware that it made his body of work smack of "do what I say, not what I do". The source I'm half-remembering has him explicitly stating that he only came around to his views on overpopulation long after he and his wife had children. The thing is, I can't remember where I read it. I've got about 8 of his books here, but I don't think it's in any of them. Can anyone help? Cheers, -- PLUMBAGO 11:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I tried to peer review this article but no edits have been made thus far. Alix11 ( talk) 00:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Garrett Hardin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:08, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Unless good arguments are made, I intend to delete the following poorly supported defamatory section. It implies racism, a relic of an old personal feud followed by pro-overpopulation forces. I was actually just at Southern Poverty Street Journal's Hardin section. It's about like this, all guilt by association and guilty of having an offensive personality or stance.
Even the topic header says almost exactly that! True he was proudly politically incorrect in a dozen ways, almost fanatically anti-overpopulation, thus openly an anti-immigrant, sealed-borders advocate. He was STRONGLY against ALL population increase, and he had the exponential numbers and logic to prove it. True Hardin was not compassionate to other overpopulated nations, and he coldly defended that, arguing existential self-defense. Yet his critics presuming guilt, list his extreme fear of overpopulation as obvious proof he's faking it so he can openly do his evil deeds.
It's true that actual despicable bigots loved his respectable non-racist scientific reasons for sealing the borders and such, but that is THEM, not Hardin's doing.
Below he's accused of having "served to lobby Congress for nativist and isolationist policies." Huh!? That makes one a racist? What's the problem? That says more about the accuser than the accused. POV. It's all about the same.
"In 1994, he was one of 52 signatories on "Mainstream Science on Intelligence"". Look who else signed. He was in pretty good company, expert scientists on the topic. True that whole book became a taboo scandal, and the bigots prolly loved it, and used it for evil, but none of those studies appeared to be motivated by racism.
The last paragraph effectively argues that Hardin is a Big Meanie, —with probable Republican Tendencies. That sounds like the Barry Commoner feud, as explained in a comment above. ""EEK!! He's NOT one of us!!! KILL IT!!"
Because Hardin did not think like a Millennial, instead he thought like one born over a hundred years ago, that does not make one a "white nationalist."
Association with white nationalism
Hardin caused controversy for his support of anti-immigrant causes during his lifetime and possible connections to the white nationalist movement. The Southern Poverty Law Center noted that Hardin served on the board of the Federation for American Immigration Reform and Social Contract Press and co-founded the anti-immigration Californians for Population Stabilization and The Environmental Fund, which according to the SPLC "served to lobby Congress for nativist and isolationist policies".
In 1994, he was one of 52 signatories on " Mainstream Science on Intelligence", an editorial written by Linda Gottfredson and published in the Wall Street Journal, which declared the consensus of the signing scholars on issues related to race and intelligence following the publication of the book The Bell Curve.
Hardin's last book The Ostrich Factor: Our Population Myopia (1999), a warning about the threat of overpopulation to the Earth's sustainable economic future, called for coercive constraints on "unqualified reproductive rights" and argued that affirmative action is a form of racism.
I see nothing here worthy of defaming a man's reputation.
--
2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:4875:D93B:AC65:D49A (
talk) 03:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC) Just Saying
In response to some continued effort to remove this content, I'm going to add the following references for Hardin's racial politics:
Matto Mildenberger, "The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the Commons", Scientific American (23 April, 2019)
Martin Abegglen, "First as Tragedy, Then as Fascism", The Baffler (26 September , 2019)
Michelle Nijhuis, "The miracle of the commons", Aeon (4 May, 2021)
More sources would not be hard to come by. This appears to be consensus knowledge which it is Wikipedia's mission to represent to our readers. Generalrelative ( talk) 03:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Mount Allison University supported by WikiProject Anthropology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
by
PrimeBOT (
talk) on 16:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wow that was fast. Just hours!
Perhaps Plumbago can inform us why he removed mine and another's descriptions of Hardin's work in the Books section? He wrote in History:
"6 December 2010 Plumbago (10,470 bytes) (Partial revert to remove excessive commentary; moved some material from Books to other sections)"
No, Plumbago utterly removed them, then swiped one of my citations with reference and created an Awards section with that info, seemingly tossing the referenced he didn't like, including a ref/link to the entire Chapter 8 text.
Ideas, concepts, and arguments, in the form of books are Hardin's production. It's what he is. Without descriptions of them the article appears little different than a stub, dry and boring, if not misleading (as it appears to me). Furthermore, quotes and descriptions paint, in my opinion, a more accurate, full, and more three-dimensional picture than the gross oversimplifications otherwise presented here (as I had suggested). Obviously "excessive commentary" is not Dr. Plumbago's problem since he did not see fit to likewise butcher his buddy's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein.
Perhaps Plumbago can give a better description of his problem, or an actual constructive criticism so that we will be able to get Hardin's to more closely resemble Einstein's, to everybody's satisfaction? Or perhaps the actual problem is that Einstein's and others need mountains and mountains of excessive commentary likewise removed so as to be dry, concise, and equally boring?
I will wait a bit before undoing this vandalism, in hopes of finding mutual consensus.
No response required.
Doug Bashford-- 68.127.84.53 ( talk) 20:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
This is correct (I believe), but appears in the article to simply undermine the preceding text. Logically it does of course, but I've definitely read something (somewhere) by Hardin that picks up this particular thread, since he was certainly aware that it made his body of work smack of "do what I say, not what I do". The source I'm half-remembering has him explicitly stating that he only came around to his views on overpopulation long after he and his wife had children. The thing is, I can't remember where I read it. I've got about 8 of his books here, but I don't think it's in any of them. Can anyone help? Cheers, -- PLUMBAGO 11:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I tried to peer review this article but no edits have been made thus far. Alix11 ( talk) 00:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Garrett Hardin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:08, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Unless good arguments are made, I intend to delete the following poorly supported defamatory section. It implies racism, a relic of an old personal feud followed by pro-overpopulation forces. I was actually just at Southern Poverty Street Journal's Hardin section. It's about like this, all guilt by association and guilty of having an offensive personality or stance.
Even the topic header says almost exactly that! True he was proudly politically incorrect in a dozen ways, almost fanatically anti-overpopulation, thus openly an anti-immigrant, sealed-borders advocate. He was STRONGLY against ALL population increase, and he had the exponential numbers and logic to prove it. True Hardin was not compassionate to other overpopulated nations, and he coldly defended that, arguing existential self-defense. Yet his critics presuming guilt, list his extreme fear of overpopulation as obvious proof he's faking it so he can openly do his evil deeds.
It's true that actual despicable bigots loved his respectable non-racist scientific reasons for sealing the borders and such, but that is THEM, not Hardin's doing.
Below he's accused of having "served to lobby Congress for nativist and isolationist policies." Huh!? That makes one a racist? What's the problem? That says more about the accuser than the accused. POV. It's all about the same.
"In 1994, he was one of 52 signatories on "Mainstream Science on Intelligence"". Look who else signed. He was in pretty good company, expert scientists on the topic. True that whole book became a taboo scandal, and the bigots prolly loved it, and used it for evil, but none of those studies appeared to be motivated by racism.
The last paragraph effectively argues that Hardin is a Big Meanie, —with probable Republican Tendencies. That sounds like the Barry Commoner feud, as explained in a comment above. ""EEK!! He's NOT one of us!!! KILL IT!!"
Because Hardin did not think like a Millennial, instead he thought like one born over a hundred years ago, that does not make one a "white nationalist."
Association with white nationalism
Hardin caused controversy for his support of anti-immigrant causes during his lifetime and possible connections to the white nationalist movement. The Southern Poverty Law Center noted that Hardin served on the board of the Federation for American Immigration Reform and Social Contract Press and co-founded the anti-immigration Californians for Population Stabilization and The Environmental Fund, which according to the SPLC "served to lobby Congress for nativist and isolationist policies".
In 1994, he was one of 52 signatories on " Mainstream Science on Intelligence", an editorial written by Linda Gottfredson and published in the Wall Street Journal, which declared the consensus of the signing scholars on issues related to race and intelligence following the publication of the book The Bell Curve.
Hardin's last book The Ostrich Factor: Our Population Myopia (1999), a warning about the threat of overpopulation to the Earth's sustainable economic future, called for coercive constraints on "unqualified reproductive rights" and argued that affirmative action is a form of racism.
I see nothing here worthy of defaming a man's reputation.
--
2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:4875:D93B:AC65:D49A (
talk) 03:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC) Just Saying
In response to some continued effort to remove this content, I'm going to add the following references for Hardin's racial politics:
Matto Mildenberger, "The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the Commons", Scientific American (23 April, 2019)
Martin Abegglen, "First as Tragedy, Then as Fascism", The Baffler (26 September , 2019)
Michelle Nijhuis, "The miracle of the commons", Aeon (4 May, 2021)
More sources would not be hard to come by. This appears to be consensus knowledge which it is Wikipedia's mission to represent to our readers. Generalrelative ( talk) 03:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Mount Allison University supported by WikiProject Anthropology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
by
PrimeBOT (
talk) on 16:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)