Hey Guys! This is one those posts that I consider one of my more important, more thought-provoking, and potentially worthy of great debate. Please read the article (what I quote doesn't do it justice), and especially from the conservatives on here, give me your thoughtful, sincere feedback. I see no reason why environmentalism has to be mutually exclusive; indeed, I believe that it could be a core base that unites us all eventually, Libertarian, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Independent alike. What do you think of this author's claims/statements? Where can we go from here? I'll reserve my thoughts for a bit if you don't mind.
Mr. Tucker, you ask: "Is it even possible to be a libertarian and an environmentalist -- or a conservative and an environmentalist, for that matter?"
These are good questions! At least when it comes to climate change, I don't think anyone has explored them with the care and attention they deserve. The question you have to answer is: How much of the enormous changes necessary can be driven by policy premised on small government, low taxes, and reduced regulation?
Lots of my leftie friends would respond: none! But I think that's wrong. I think there are actually huge areas of public policy ripe for green/libertarian cooperation. I once wrote that ... (see article for more)
Greens want communities that generate more of their own energy and food, that are more self-reliant and resilient, less dependent on large, distant power centers. Is rugged self-reliance not a conservative virtue? Right now the energy industry is the sector of our economy that most resembles socialism: rule by a cozy cabal of politicians, cartels, and corporate welfare recipients. Greens want to break that cabal up, to decentralize control over energy, to expose it to more competition and innovation. Is decentralized power not a conservative virtue?
In short, there's a great deal that libertarians, conservatives, and climate hawks can agree on in the short-term. I hope you'll keep thinking, keep digging, and keep writing about it. This debate badly needs a productive, reality-based conservative voice.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
A TRUE conservative is an environmentalist. The only reason not to be is if you've decided short term gain is more important than the on going well being of our people.
Absolutely is the answer. Read Backwoods Home magazine, its mostly written by Libertarians and Constitutional conservatives that believe in self reliance. That is a real Greener concept than buying into some of the crap being spewed elsewhere.
Yes. If you are going John Galt, you want to use solar rather than relying on the goverment regulated grid. Put in more insulation because it makes financial sense rather than due to some stupid goverment tax break.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
SC, I don't have time to read the entire article right now, but I don't think it is possible in today's political environment. You are quickly labelled a "RINO" or ususally they just go straight to "leftist" or "socialist" if you try and argue for the environment. Environmentalism is usually at odds with industry (although it need not be) and raises the hackles on most of the "conservative" backs.
It's the simple truth Heartless. If you dare to suggest that industry be regulated on what enviromental impacts they are allowed to dump on to taxpayers in pursuit of profits you are labelled a treehugger and job killer. The idea that profits be pursued responsibly has become heresy within the GOP. Additionally the anti-science stance taken recently is obviously a dodge to preserve high profits for industry.
But liberals can also be divided about the enviroment. They claim they want jobs to return to this country but then go NIMBY everytime industry, mining, or even energy production. So do they want to help out the blue collar core of the party or do they prefer to please the eco-radical branch of the party?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Environmental concerns are extremely important to me. I believe that any government will try to rape our country of its natural resources by giving them to corporations. All corporations need to be regulated to prevent polution of our natural resources and environment.
Not everything spouted by liberals is scientific truth. Here is where the controversy starts. Liberals say that if you do not agree, unquestioningly, with everything that we put forward, then you are not an environmentalist.
So now begins the argument of "global warming". Or is it now "climate change"?