This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at

Your Ad Here

Saturday, April 24, 2010

The DDT Conspiracy Theory

I saw an interesting new conspiracy theory circulating. It says "DDT is harmful!" is State propaganda.

I remember learning about DDT and the ban in my State brainwashing center (school). The story is that State leaders were brilliant for banning this harmful chemical.

Just because you learned something in school, doesn't automatically mean it's wrong. It's possible that DDT really is harmful to humans and other animals. If a chemical kills insects, it may have harmful effects on other animals.

Even if DDT is safe and effective, it won't work forever. Over time, insects would evolve immunity to DDT, just like antibiotic-resistant bacteria are evolving.

Who profits from banning DDT? Originally, DDT was patented. The patent expired. By banning DDT, other pesticides can be promoted instead. They may be more or less safe and effective than DDT. Banning DDT creates a profit opportunity for other patented pesticides.

As another example, incandescent light bulb technology is in the public domain. Banning incandescent light bulbs gives a monopoly to insiders who own the patent for compact fluorescent light bulbs. Due to the incandescent light bulb ban, a handful of insiders now have a State-backed light bulb monopoly.

The DDT ban is hyped as a success for the State. Even if DDT really is harmful, a really free market could handle the ban. People injured by DDT could sue the polluter. A free market court would be fair.

In the present, the State justice monopoly protects polluters. Pursing an environmental lawsuit is expensive and time consuming. Insiders like an expensive drawn-out legal system, because it protects them from negative consequences of fraud and misconduct.

The legal system provides the illusion of justice rather than real justice. Via "Problem! Reaction! Solution!", this creates the illusion that more State regulations are needed. Paradoxically, polluting insiders like environmental regulations. They just have to do the minimum required by the regulation, and they're immune from liability.

I have no idea if DDT really is harmful or if that's just State propaganda. Other pesticides currently used may be just as bad or worse. It makes sense that a chemical that kills insects also hurts other animals. However, it also makes sense that insiders banned DDT so they could profit.

As usual, the State science monopoly makes it hard to determine the real truth. I have to put "DDT is harmful!" in the "I'm not sure." category.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Wow, you really missed the point on this. The "conspiracy" is that DDT was saving too many African lives and making a severe overpopulation problem worse. Wars, predators and disease are needed to control populations. DDT was eliminating malaria and it was saving too many lives. The world conspired, in theory, to make sure that millions of Africans die.

Think about it. When has the world agreed on any science? The science here is inconclusive. What chemical can save millions of lives? Why a worldwide ban? Why not let countries decide for themeselves as they do with every other issue?

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at