{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02053915275994865, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0025673940949935813, 'mean_word_length': 5.523012552301255, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Live and let die: the tragedy of Hardin's social Darwinism

Under a paradigm of unlimited natural resources and recipient capacity for emissions, raising the material standard of the world's poor did not seem to be seriously in conflict with increasing consumption levels in affluent nations, even with a growing global population. In a finite world, increased consumption in wealthy countries will reduce the possibility of meeting the needs of a growing population in developing countries within the limits set by the Earth's ecological carrying capacity. The UN World Commission on Environment and Development met this challenge by recommending stronger reductions in the consumption of energy and natural resources in developed than in developing countries, in order to make space for increased standards of living among the world's poor. Today, the willingness among decision makers in rich countries to pursue a sustainable and globally solidary development appears to have declined significantly. Instead, a cynicism or hostility against ‘the Others’ seems to gain momentum. Within the environmental discourse, such cynicism is rooted in particular in the writings of the influential American biologist Garrett Hardin, notably his 1974 article ‘Living on a Lifeboat’. Below, Hardin's ‘Lifeboat ethic’ is reviewed and critically discussed, focusing on the hidden premises embedded in Hardin's position. In the final part of the paper, the environmental consequences of economic growth and increasing consumption levels in wealthy nations are addressed.