When one rejects the dominant ideology of contemporary green environmentalism, it is common to be pressed (attacked?) to espouse the principles of an alternative ideology. Those in thrall to the prevailing dogma, have a hard time conceiving of what an alternative perspective might be, let alone viewing such an alternative with respect.
This post nicely encapsulates many of the key precepts of rational environmentalism as an alternative to green dogma. The predominant areas of difference are:
- a belief that free-market capitalism provides a solution to environmental issues rather than their cause
- that limits to growth are ideological constructs and not a physical reality
- an emphasis on sustained globalization rather than global sustainability
- that hysteria and politicized science are devices to obscure and dissuade widespread debate of public policy options
- global warming is a myth that detracts attention from real issues, and
- there are no environmental problems that are beyond our capacity to resolve.
Rejecting the prevailing dogma is not an act of immorality nor insensitivity. Disagreeing with dogma does not preclude one from being an active and passionate environmentalist. It does, however, require greater resolve and personal responsibility, not least of which is the willingness to think and act independently of the herd.
