As this post documents very clearly, at least one political party in Canada has taken to hiding its policy advocacy behind the front of a supposed 'environmental group. That this party calls itself "liberal" is the real oxymoron, as they appear to adopt tactics that contradict any definition of libertarianism.
Oh, yes, my bad. I was forgetting that in the case of ecomyths it's the end that justifies the means, any means apparently.
If the cause is sufficiently just (and as the same people define what is and is not moral, their cause has to be just doesn't it?) then procedure, rule of law, and concepts like justice, can all be superseded by the need to act: what a blessing the precautionary principle is to such zealots -- don't have to prove anything, except the possibility of harm -- and you can justify any intervention.
Especially interventions that supply more revenue, jobs and careers for those raising the possibility of harm in the first place, the definition of morality in play, the media reaction, education....wow, maybe even a scientific consensus -- that will intimidate some, alienate others, isolate any critics.
And just why is George Orwell still classified as fiction?