The below is supposed to be yesterday's post. I had them typed out but I was too tired and went to bed before posting it.
I was sitting on the metal railing waiting to take the feeder bus back home today. This is something which I have not done in ages, ever since I decided to cut costs and walk back home. The heavy rain was the deterrence that was needed to convince me to take the bus instead of braving the elements.
Sitting there, I looked at the surroundings, especially the perking lots for the buses. There is a row of trees planted in front of the lots. I presume their purpose is to provided shade and shield off the sun in better days, thus keeping the driver seat cool. Even though most of the buses are air-conditioned now, there is just so much cooling effect the aircon can bring about.
The bus interchange will soon be demolished and in its place, a huge carpark will be built. At least, this is what I gathered from the papers and my mom. In fact, my mom IS the papers. She scrutinise each article with such great detail that never fail to amaze me. Any piece of news that come sfrom her is 98% accurate. The other 2%? Well, she is only human and tends to misinterpret certain news. Anyway, if the interchange is to go, I thought, wouldn't the trees be chopped down too? *gasp*
Yes, they will be dealt with certain death, a quick one though, with a chain saw chewing into their bodies in a few well-aim strokes. Does the trees know the impending doom? They're living things too and I suppose they must have their ways of communication. I feel sad for them. After so many years of service of providing shade, they are now going to be murdered for the sole purpose of building a carpark? Some may argue that this is actually benefical and aids greater advancement in standard of living. But have we not caused the environment enough harm in the name of "greater advancement in standard of living"? Tearing a hole in the once-perfect ozone layer, depleting the oil wells, wilfully destroying habitats of many through massive logging operations and many more reckless actions.
I suppose even if the trees can talk and defend their stand, they would be still slaughtered. We live in a world where majority wins. Sure, the minority has rights too. Rights to suffer in silence and to be ignored when their opinions are raised, that is. Human population outnumber that of trees and as a majority, it's our word against theirs. Can we lose?
Speaking of majority and minority brings me to another thought. Suppose someones proposes a marvellous solution to the ageing population problem and the ever increasing toil on resources problem (due to population growth). I think many will listen to him with great interest. The solution? Round up all the elderly and remove them. You see, the elderly are almost useless and they do take up space and resources. If they are gone, then we will have no ageing population, simply because there is no elderly to make up the "elderly population". If that person can garner enough support, he will gradually form a "majority", one that far exceeds the minority in terms of numbers and vocal. The "minority" can argue and debate but eventually they be herded towards massive incinerators. Humans and trees, what difference is there?
If we can sacrifice the trees that had has servicing us for years in silence, what makes you think that the old won't be the next in line in future, especially when some find them a nuisance? In fact, anyone of us can be next. Some may argue that ties do bind and children will not sit idly while their elderly parents are being threatened by death. Bear in mind that human are selfish. After all, humans are nothing but animals and are ultimately programmed to procreate, so as to ensure the species' survival. With the in mind, why wouldn't they kill something (or someone) to ensure their own survival?
I was sitting on the metal railing waiting to take the feeder bus back home today. This is something which I have not done in ages, ever since I decided to cut costs and walk back home. The heavy rain was the deterrence that was needed to convince me to take the bus instead of braving the elements.
Sitting there, I looked at the surroundings, especially the perking lots for the buses. There is a row of trees planted in front of the lots. I presume their purpose is to provided shade and shield off the sun in better days, thus keeping the driver seat cool. Even though most of the buses are air-conditioned now, there is just so much cooling effect the aircon can bring about.
The bus interchange will soon be demolished and in its place, a huge carpark will be built. At least, this is what I gathered from the papers and my mom. In fact, my mom IS the papers. She scrutinise each article with such great detail that never fail to amaze me. Any piece of news that come sfrom her is 98% accurate. The other 2%? Well, she is only human and tends to misinterpret certain news. Anyway, if the interchange is to go, I thought, wouldn't the trees be chopped down too? *gasp*
Yes, they will be dealt with certain death, a quick one though, with a chain saw chewing into their bodies in a few well-aim strokes. Does the trees know the impending doom? They're living things too and I suppose they must have their ways of communication. I feel sad for them. After so many years of service of providing shade, they are now going to be murdered for the sole purpose of building a carpark? Some may argue that this is actually benefical and aids greater advancement in standard of living. But have we not caused the environment enough harm in the name of "greater advancement in standard of living"? Tearing a hole in the once-perfect ozone layer, depleting the oil wells, wilfully destroying habitats of many through massive logging operations and many more reckless actions.
I suppose even if the trees can talk and defend their stand, they would be still slaughtered. We live in a world where majority wins. Sure, the minority has rights too. Rights to suffer in silence and to be ignored when their opinions are raised, that is. Human population outnumber that of trees and as a majority, it's our word against theirs. Can we lose?
Speaking of majority and minority brings me to another thought. Suppose someones proposes a marvellous solution to the ageing population problem and the ever increasing toil on resources problem (due to population growth). I think many will listen to him with great interest. The solution? Round up all the elderly and remove them. You see, the elderly are almost useless and they do take up space and resources. If they are gone, then we will have no ageing population, simply because there is no elderly to make up the "elderly population". If that person can garner enough support, he will gradually form a "majority", one that far exceeds the minority in terms of numbers and vocal. The "minority" can argue and debate but eventually they be herded towards massive incinerators. Humans and trees, what difference is there?
If we can sacrifice the trees that had has servicing us for years in silence, what makes you think that the old won't be the next in line in future, especially when some find them a nuisance? In fact, anyone of us can be next. Some may argue that ties do bind and children will not sit idly while their elderly parents are being threatened by death. Bear in mind that human are selfish. After all, humans are nothing but animals and are ultimately programmed to procreate, so as to ensure the species' survival. With the in mind, why wouldn't they kill something (or someone) to ensure their own survival?
posted by hg @ 21:48
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home