Why is anyone who cares about the planet branded as a "tree-hugging hippie"?

Question

And why is "environmentalist" such a dirty word? I care about the planet, but that doesn't mean I'm some crazy leftist radical.

Wow...am I the only one that's both a social conservative and environmentalist?

Answer 1

i agree with you...i generally feel like those unconcerned with the environment should be stigmatized, not the other way around.

most of them, sadly, are consumed by materialism and are saturated by pervasive anthropocentric thinking that makes me feel quite ill (the person above me is a perfect example of this -- only cares as long as it suits Mr. Hunter). they're so clueless it'd be laughable if it weren't so sad. if the environment goes down, we all go...they just can't see how we're all interconnected -- they take it for granted, which is easy when your only interaction with the environment is going to the grocery store. most of them would starve if the food bins were empty.

rick: see? owls and rats? it truly is beyond you.

Answer 2

Disparaging environmentalists is simply an effective propaganda tool and smear tactic. Caring about the environment runs counter to some business interests and has not been part of the basic conservative agenda but, rather, heretofore, has been associated with a more progressive agenda. As you point out, the association that is promulgated is that an environmentalist is “some crazy leftist radical.” That association is not accidental. Caring about the environment has therefore been attacked through political mechanisms by ridicule, scorn, disparagement and misinformation. Convincing people that they can pollute with abandon and that addressing environmental concerns will adversely affect the economy also appeals to their lack of responsibility, greed and fear. These methods have been quite effective.

Answer 3

Actually, it is possible to embrace green technology and still turn a proffit.

The US subsidizes farmers to not grow vegetables, across the country. These same subsideies can be turned toward the economic sector to finance the developement of bio-fuel exploration, with or without such corporations as Texaco or BP. Frankly, these oil companies are rather dim-witted to not champion this idea, since they could in turn, buy said vegetables from the farmers who now would be growing vegetables, again, and use them for the creation of pulp and bio-fuels. They could begin adding bio-fuel pumps to their gas stations, and when we finally do kick OPEC out of our pocket books, the oil companies would still turn a proffit, having been wise enough to get in on the game. The monies we use for foreign aid to OPEC nations could be turned around and used to redevelope nations like Cuba, Brazil, and the South American, Southeast Asian, and African states with strong agricultural bases. This could be a huge thing for everybody, if we just used our freakin' heads. The global job growth potential in this is HUGE!!!

"Conservation means development as much as it does protection. I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us."
- President Theodore Roosevelt, "The New Nationalism" speech, Osawatomie, Kansas, August 31, 1910

Now there's an Old School Conservative for ya, right there! TR is the man!

Answer 4

When I was younger, being an environmentalist meant you were into coming up with solutions to beatify parks, forests, etc. The Sierra Club, Boy Scouts, etc. We then went out and built trails, cutouts, planted trees. The environmentalist of today is a Radical. They hate capitalism. They've actually burned new houses down in Tucson, and elsewhere. They hate cars. They've use the government to shut down planned communities because of rare bugs. I know this isn't everyone. But it is the Al Gores, and some of these Radical groups that have given environmentalist a bad name.

Answer 5

There are extremeists in everything, it is good to have convictions and morals. it is better to have the character that goes with them, you have both.
I believe what our late humorist Richard Jenni use to say, there are Far Right Wing Conservatives and there are Far Left Wing Liberals, both of them are whacked out and ready to send others to die for thier crazy paranoia. Some of the ones on the right are ok, some on the are ok, none have it figured out, so I choose to be in the center.
I do not vote party lines, I do not vote Lobbyist veiws, I do not vote for humans over trees, I like the idea of trees over humans. Am I an enviromentalist kook? no, I am a person that does not like sundurns.
Keep some trees up there, please.

Answer 6

No, actually you are what George Lakoff calls a biconceptual, not an independent or centrist. You have some of the beliefs of both parties. There is nothing wrong with your beliefs. At least you have some! Check out some of his books I've listed below.

Answer 7

It really depends upon what's going along with it.

I'm of the school that wants alternative fuels, not just to help the environment, but to stop the flow of funds to people who export oil and hate us at the same time.

That being said, Al Gore now qualifies as a meat eating tree hugger, and apparently fails PETA's 'litmus test'.

Some Greens go as far as to say human procreation is OK so long as the planet isn't sick. So, they basically are for government population control (can you say, China?), which is not what I would want for America.

Answer 8

Thats something cons started long ago. They thinks it's just fine to suck all the good out of the earth and to heck with the wild life ( unless it's to shoot them ) and it's just fine to drill an oil well right in the middle of Miami Beach. So when you talk about trying to protect wild life or limit the amount of dirt that we put in our air, your consireded a tree hugger. They don't know that years from now. their G Kids will have to live on this earth,, that is,if they are smart enough to produce the likes. Did you see Bush being interviewed last night??? He has jumped onto the Gore Bandwagon with Bio Fuels. Although we all know that he himself has called enviromentalists " Tree Huggers ". He wants to burn corn for sure. Why, because with all the property he owns, he can turn a profit, not because it's clean.

Answer 9

The problem is that "the planet" comprises 6.5 billion people each of whom has made his own half acre fit his own ideal, and "caring for the planet" is often a euphemism for dictating to others what they can and can't do with their respective half acres.

I drive to work. I'm not "destroying the planet."

I threw away a thermometer once. Triple-bagged it and threw it out. I'll do it again in 40 years when the replacement is thrown out. I'm not "destroying the planet."

I threw away three near-empty cans of paint three months ago. Double bagged. And five years ago I threw away another. And ten years from now maybe there will be another. Doesn't amount to "destroying the planet."

If you choose to jump through a bunch of hoops to not to this, and if you choose to spend your time sorting your garbage, great, I don't make fun of you for that. But you're not "saving the planet" from anything. If it makes you feel better, go for it. You're no more "saving" anyone or anything than you would be if you'd spent that time praying.

Answer 10

I think it is more about which u feel is more important, the economy or the enviornment, both have big impaccts but the economic one has a quicker timeframe of when it will happen, so we should solve for the economy while hurting the enviornment then later use the technological advancement to solve for the enviornment. so simply put one before the other, if we go to control the enviornment u hurt the economy, but the economy will hurt the enviornment. so if u put the enviornment first u are basically saying that the "tree" is more important than ur countries entire economy.

Answer 11

I do care about what happens with the planet.....especially my 25 acres!

BUT...I do believe that helping the unfortunate is a BIT more important than the tree on my property which fell from ice this winter.

PRIORITIES PEOPLE!

The unfortunate humans should always come first!