In a recent interview, former Maine Senator George Mitchell "called upon President Barack Obama — and everyone else who backs stiff environmental protection laws and the science behind climate change — to be bold and persistent in the face of opponents." In a keynote address to the Natural Resources Council of Maine, Mitchell said, "“We’ve all seen environmental protection used as a scapegoat for whatever society’s problems are, but it will not last... I believe this anti-science movement will fade away over time. Remember, it took a long time for people to realize the world is not flat."
Judging from the recent Republican presidential "debates", Miami and South Florida may be under water before the flat earthers give up their grasp of the conservative right.
So if you are an environmentalist -- say, a leader of one of the most visible, national environmental groups-- what kind of message do you use in these times? On the one hand, Obama is a president inclined to evidence, data and science. On the other hand he may be persuaded that embracing environmental protection will doom his re-election. That was, by the way, exactly how Bill Clinton reacted to the 1994 Republican landslide in Congress, led by Newt Gingrich.
What environmental leaders are focusing on is the importance of environmental protection to jobs, and the sense of deja vu is profound. Today, all public pronouncements on the value of Everglades restoration highlight the contribution of shovel-ready projects that employ Floridians, the value of tourism and fisheries and the cost to coastal real estate from rampant pollution. However well-meaning and expertly crafted, the Republican-led state legislature is utterly tone-deaf to the environmentalists' entreaties. Instead, the economic crisis is being used a stake to drive through the heart of environmentalism, taking Florida back-- not twenty years-- but thirty or forty years.
The rebuttal by state GOP leaders against environmental protection is that we can only afford to protect the environment through a healthy economy. (This, by the way, is the Jeb Bush Hierarchy of Needs.) When you hear Republican presidential candidates arguing against the federal budget and federal services of agencies like the EPA, that is the chorus line.
Listening to environmentalists recalls the late 1980's and the genesis of the Wise Use Movement, born in the western reaches of timber, oil, and ranching states. The Wise Use Movement was fueled by the threat of scarcity, even though it germinated during an era of great abundance. It is the same dynamic, catalyzed by right-wing Christian conservatives, and further fueled by fear as the promise of abundance and prosperity for future generations fades. Without a doubt, this organization of powerful, monied interests has been the most successful political movement in modern US history.
As a result, disbelief in science has a powerful grip on the United States. But environmentalists ought to recognize where they are. It is a well traveled road -- arguing the economic benefits of environmental protection--, and it turns out to be a loop road leading straight back to the large corporate influences on campaigns and elections. Environmentalists need to appeal for clear eyes, strong hearts to reject the flat earthers. Their best chance is from within the conservative right itself and leaders who articulate how the destruction of God's creation is a crime against Christian values of love and compassion. It is not about jobs. It is about countering a misguided populism that wears Christian virtues on its sleeve.
5 comments:
You hit the nail on the head Gimleteye! The latest symptom was earlier this month when Obama announced EPA was withdrawing his new ozone air standards - thus putting the default, Bush-era standard in place, despite the fact that EPA Administrator Sheila Jackson has admitted they are "legally indefensible." Obama's reasons? Jobs.
Somehow protecting the environment has become a partisan issue. Despite the fact that many Republicans care about the environment. They are silenced by the Fox news hate radio messages designed to misinform. I agree that the spin reminds me of the Wise Use rhetoric, making it seem like radical hippie enviros are after the American way of life.
Green voters need to vote in 2012, and make sure that candidates know it - and get BOTH parties to adopt good environmental platforms.
Keep a close eye on the new mayor’s reorganization of County government, which will combine the county’s building and zoning functions with its environmental regulatory agency - DERM. Who Gimenez chooses to head this new mega-department, and the independence with which its environmental arm is able to operate, will be very telling.
People might embrace the concept of Global Warming if the scientist from East Anglia University studying the subject stop forging the data in their desperate attempts to get people to believe in the movement. (& for increased funding).
It also does not help when major Papal contributors & figures (Pope Goldman Sachs IV & Pastor Al Gore) endorse climate change doctrine like Cap & Trade in order to benefit from Carbon trading transactions.
I guess we just need to trust the authorities and agree to whatever they say is indeed science so that they can "fundamentally" reorganize our society.
This kind of approach really takes an act of faith that everything will be okay if we only listen to and trust them.
Despite having to call the Hazmat crew to remove the high mercury content after the curly fry light bulb breaks in a childs bedroom or when the traffic lights ice over and eliminate visibility because the incandescent light bulb with ice melting output has been removed in the name of progress, our works and deeds will create a better society and transform our lives in the proper image of Washington beaurcrats.
We are sinners against "mother nature" and we must repent and atone for our sins according to what our clerics dictate.
Genius,
Let me say it for you.
Putz.
Thank you last anon... You have a good handle on the blog comment retort. Do you want a non-paying job?
Post a Comment