Parables Of A Green Environment

There are politicians who are flat-outGore and Kennedy are both doing good work on
anti-environmental---they just don't buy thebehalf of the environment-they rank in the Top
argument. As long as they state their case plainly10 of the world's most effective environmental
and honestly, we can at least respect their rightadvocates. And they both no doubt make plenty
to their opinion, however misinformed it may be.of eco-friendly lifestyle choices. But to be a
Others, however, have taken to deceit, craftinghigh-profile environmentalist and not fully walk the
back-room deals that are a negative for thetalk-even if only in terms of the perception they
environment but then trying to sell the public oncreate-is hugely problematic. The public does not
the new regulations by claiming they're anlike hypocrites, environmental or otherwise, and
environmental improvement. We think that's agiving opponents of environmental progress the
clear form of environmental hypocrisy and can beopportunity to throw hypocritical mud on your
described as "listen to what I say, but don't watchrighteous arguments reduces the power of your
what I do." Let's go through a few examples.message and distracts people from the real
In campaign speeches prior to the 2000 election,issues. For some in the audience, these slight
George W. Bush promised to do something aboutnegatives weigh heavily against the
global warming if elected president. The insincerityoverwhelmingly positive work Kennedy and Gore
of the promise was made clear shortly after hedo.
took office when he reneged on his pledge,We find most mainstream environmental groups
claiming that joining the Kyoto protocol would hurtto be fairly on-target with their overall goals and
the US economy. In reality, doing something aboutmethods, but we think some of them act
global warming would hurt only somehypocritically occasionally. For instance, most
industries---notably Big Energy and Big Auto, bothmajor US environmental groups are silent on the
heavy contributors to the Bush campaign. Overall,issue of global population-and, more specifically,
delaying action on global warming will cost us farsilent on the issue of US population.
more in the long run. Making a promise to doRemember that one's individual environmental
something about global warming without anyfootprint is roughly based on the amount of
intention of keeping the promise it was a form ofenergy and resources used and the amount of
environmental hypocrisy.waste produced. The total US environmental
To those people who take a pro-life stance, wefootprint is based on the average individual
ask: Is the health of a child already born not justenvironmental footprint of a US resident times
as important to you as the health of a child still inthe number of people in the country. Since the
the womb? If so, do you voice your opinions onaverage individual environmental footprint in the
childhood health care and the above environmentalUS is very big compared to the global average,
issues as strongly as you voice your opinions onadding more people in the US is clearly an
abortion?environmental negative.
Our intention here is not to debate the merits ofTo talk about the problem of US population
pro-choice vs. pro-life but rather to say that it isgrowth only in terms of sprawl is dishonest. But
hypocritical to be supremely worried about thethe US population level-and ways to check its
fate of unborn children while being unconcernedgrowth-is a touchy issue, and green groups would
about things (environmental or otherwise) that"rather not go there.
affect already-born children.