Image via
Advertisement
Advertisement
Layzer, via MIT
Advertisement
manipulation. It is inherently uncertain because of the unpredictable nature of the world itself and because of our limited ability to experiment on and/or understand
the world. When we make claims about the importance of addressing environmental problems, we are making value judgments about our willingness to
bear the risks of serious damage. Of course, conservatives don’t want to say that directly; that’s an argument they might lose. But they can (and do) take pot shots at the science, picking on individual studies, trying to discredit individual scientists,finding scientists who disagree with the “consensus” view, etc. And since most people don’t understand how science is done or what the science actually says, it’s not that hard to cast doubt on the scientific foundation for environmental claims.
Advertisement
This Nixon-era PSA hits on the environmental costs of urban blight in America
Advertisement
Advertisement
discovered a concern among environmentalists over the way their objectives will be received by a public fed so much propaganda?I have mostly avoided the term “anti-environmental” in favor of the term “antiregulatory,” in an effort to treat conservatives’ views with some respect. It is true, however, that empirically, the net effect of most antiregulatory activism has been anti-environmental.But to get to your main question, I think (and argue in the book) that the conservative movement has had profound effects on the environmental movement and on what kinds of arguments the public is willing to entertain. I found that many environmentalists are reluctant to acknowledge the power of conservatives’ antiregulatory activism. They prefer, instead, to focus on industry lobbying—ignoring the fact that conservatives have given industry arguments legitimacy. Mostly, environmentalists seem to be self-critical: it’s their fault; they have failed to figure out how to get the public to care about climate change, for example, or how to translate public concern into policy.
There’s no question in my mind that journalists and others in the media are still intimidated by conservatives’ critiques.
because fights over natural resources/biodiversity are widely perceived as regional. And for electoral reasons, most administrations are reluctant to pick fights with the West, where support for resource development remains strong and mobilized. It seems to me this is why Obama chose Salazar to head the Interior Departmen because he’s not a strong environmentalist; if he wanted to take a stand, he could have picked Raul Grijalva of Arizona. Given Salazar’s predilections, we should be surprised when he makes some predevelopment decisions. Lisa Jackson, by contrast, has been more willing to stand up for restrictive rules. But she’s at the EPA, which has a clear mission and—despite conservatives’ best efforts—is still widely regarded as an agency that protects the (national) public.I think if we want to see real change, we can’t wait for politicians to act; we have to force their hand. Of course, given our campaign finance system, it’s an uphill battle for environmentalists to galvanize the public. And many Americans—even those who consider themselves environmentalists—seem unwilling to make even small changes in their lifestyles. I suspect few would currently support the kind of economic transformation that will actually be necessary if we’re going to restore the world’s badly damaged life-support systems. So that’s all pretty discouraging.That said, I think there are some reasons for hope, but they don’t lie in national politics (at least not yet). Many environmentalists are putting their efforts behind cultivating sustainability at a local/regional level and developing and disseminating a progressive storyline that appeals to a broad coalition, not just environmentalists. My own view is that most people simply cannot imagine what an environmentally sustainable economy would look like, so creating local examples is really important. In terms of creating a more broadly based movement, during the period that the Occupy Movement was in the streets, it seemed to me that people were beginning to make the connection between the global, finance-driven economy and a whole set of other ills, from environmental degradation to massive economic inequality to social dysfunction. The generation of people currently in their twenties should be enraged at what they are inheriting.