Anti-environmentalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.(April 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. |
Anti-environmentalism is a backlash against the global environmentalist movement. It often claims conservationist ideals and purports to emphasize scientific rigor while at the same time accusing environmentalists of failing to do so. Anti-environmentalists tend to favor free market principles and hold the view that nature is intended for humankind's use. Chiefly in the US, the term is often used in conjunction with the Wise Use Movement, with which shares its ideology. This counter-movement against the sustainability thesis has two primary and underlying aims:
First, it has an interest in demonstrating the alleged counter productivity of environmental laws and government regulation.
Secondly, it aims to undermine any green ideology that challenges neo-classical economic praxis, and that does not support, for example, private property rights, monetary rule and 'rational resource development'. [1] </ref>
[edit] Overview
Paula Snyder and Peter Millson characterize environmentalist ideology as unscientific, irrational and anti-humanist. [2]
- "What we today call 'environmentalism' is ... based on a fear of change," says Frank Furedi. "It's based upon a fear of the outcome of human action. And therefore it's not surprising that when you look at the more xenophobic right-wing movements in Europe in the 19th century, including German fascism, it quite often had a very strong environmentalist dynamic to it." [3]
- "Trees and forests provide a good example of how it's possible to have a growing economy and a growing population and a thriving environment," says Steve Hayward of the Pacific Research Centre. "The lesson from trees really applies across the environment. We have cleaner air today; we have cleaner water; we grow more food at less impact on the land; we have more wildlife diversity— and we've done all this while having a growing economy and a growing population." [4]
[edit] Criticisms
Critics of anti-environmentalism point to the diversity of views that are accommodated and freely debated within environmentalist circles. While illiberal views are doubtless held by a few (as in any large group), the overwhelming tendency of the movement is liberal, with many identifying with select tenets of humanism. (Although rigid anthropocentrism of some humanists is seen as arrogant by some environmentalists.) Thus, arguments such as these seem aimed more at de-legitimizing environmentalists, and hence undermining the argument for environmental policies that may constrain private property rights and/or unregulated commerce.
Another tactic commonly employed by anti-environmentalists is attempting to demonstrate that assumptions of ecological deterioration are flawed. Only a few anti-environmentalists go as far as to argue that rivers, soils, etc. have never been healthier. Supplementing this device is the claim that environmentalists lack scientific rigor or employ hyperbole over fact. While unscientific claims are sometimes made by some environmentalists, generalized comments such as those of Hayward (above) are arguably propaganda arguments that portray guilt by association. They may instead belie an ideological position that feels threatened by numerous reports of global environmental decline.
Most anti-environmentalists believe that the environment is not as urgent an issue as the scientists who accept the environmentalists tenants claim.
