A reader disagrees derogatorily with my views on green conservatism. “Michael” comments on my essay GREEN CONSERVATISM: The hijacking of environmentalism by conservatives through an idea called green conservatism:
It’s the liberals and Democrats who have “hijacked” conservation and environmentalism, sport.
However, liberals and democrats have made both conservation and environmentalism more relevant by making environmental issues part of the public debate more so than conservatives or republicans. There are no conservative think tanks that champion appropriate environmental solutions. There are no conservative organizations suing the government to protect endangered and threatened species. In fact, search results for the “Endangered Species Act” at The Heartland Institute doesn’t exactly yield results that put the law in a positive light (The Heartland Institute is a conservative organization). Certainly, the democrats could be doing more but their colleagues the Republicans of the Bush Administration aren’t exactly bleeding green. Instead they bleed black oil.
Due to apparent inescapable environmental degradation, the republicans and conservatives have no choice but to recognize environmental issues. In addition, they will try anything to seem relevant including using or “hijacking” elements from environmentalism that fit their agenda. These elements may include market-based regulation, quotas or taxes, which are often associated with the creature “green conservatism” but these elements alone cannot solve the problems of environmental degradation and must be part of a broader environmental management toolkit. Environmental issues are too complex to manage via market-based initiatives alone. Furthermore, liberals have studied and implemented market-based systems for some time. In fact, market-based solutions to environmental degradation were a big part of one of my graduate courses and there were no apparent conservatives amongst my colleagues. Maybe the one person who wore his student ID around his neck as if he was coming to work to NASA or the CIA everyday may have been somewhat conservative (he could have played the PC in the Mac ads).
Most of today’s republicans in Congress are in no position or qualified to manage the environment. Most of the republicans are perceived to be reckless and hostile to past, current and future attempts to adequate, reasonable and realistic environmental management initiatives. They just don’t understand the issues because it’s not in their “DNA” to do so because environmentalism has for the most part been an appreciation and worry amongst democrats and liberals.
However, I can’t totally shut out republicans because there have been republicans who have done great things for the environment. Certainly the greatest environmentalists, conservationists or naturalists have been hunters and fisheries – many whom are conservative and/or republican. The Endangered Species Act was conceived under Richard Nixon’s administration and Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. was the conservation president who strengthened our national park system. Being an explorer, hunter and naturalist, Roosevelt would abhor the environmental policies of the Bush Administration. Hunting and fishing are impossible if there are no environmental regulations. In addition, if Nixon had hindsight the Endangered Species Act may be much different or nonexistent. Considering the Bush Administration and past, current and future priorities, republican and conservative politicians especially the neoconservatives have lagged on environmental issue(s) in my opinion.
—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse me or my work and their image is protected under an attribution license.
