Saving Nature

Question: Do you agree with the author of "Saving Nature"? Is it sane environmentalism to emphasize humans over nature? State your opinion and support it.

Through the “Saving Nature”, written by Charles Krauthammer, are facts and arguments about environmental luxuries and environment necessities or, more generally, humans and nature. As far as I can see, the author’s opinion are extremely acute and accurate. His idea about the environmental luxuries and the environment necessities relate me to the two concepts of romanticism and realism in humans’ life. It is undoubtedly true that the way humans choose to individually protect the environment more or less is more or less similar to the way they choose to follow romantic or pragmatic life. When a group of ten polite people who still have to work hard for living-expenses are asked to support an urgently donated fund for protecting threatening animals a big amount of money by some paper survey, at least half of them agree. However, if such an event happens in reality, at least half of them will hesitate and refuse. This example is somehow like the situation: “ask hardworking voters to sacrifice in the name of the snail darter, and, if they are feeling polite, they will give you a shrug.” Humans will always support something without conditions unless it affects their interests. Extensively, people only altogether save nature in case they saving nature exactly means saving their life.