I see environmentalism increasingly causing environmental degradation because the core of its practice is misguided. I started this post to write about the two greatest flaws I see in environmentalism, but three more came to me while writing. My goal is not to be comprehensive or authoritative but to provoke thought and behavior change.
[EDIT: I came up with more since posting, so now more than 5. I may keep updating.]
- To believe that suing more solar, wind, or any energy source, including nuclear or, should it ever work, fusion, will lower use of fossil fuels or uranium, or their resulting pollution and depletion.
- Corollary: To believe that calling solar, wind, or any energy source as implemented today “clean,” “green,” or “renewable” means that it is clean, green, or renewable.
- I propose recognizing instead that only reducing pollution, depletion, use of fossil fuels, or use of uranium reduces pollution, depletion, use of fossil fuels, or use of uranium.
- To believe that reducing pollution and depletion makes your life or culture worse
- Corollary: They have no hands-on practical experience
- To confuse protecting or conserving the environment with stopping the cause of its needing protection: New human behavior
- To believe that you can lead others to live by values you don’t live by yourself.
- Result: They look like doctors smoking cigarettes lecturing on how unhealthy smoking is, claiming their personal action doesn’t affect the systemic problem, not understanding why no one listens to them.
- To confuse effective leadership skills with manipulation, being sneaky, or something icky
- Corollary: To believe that telling people facts and knowledge will change their behavior.
- Corollary: To practice convincing, coercing, cajoling
- Corollary: To prioritize educating children over leading influential adults
- Corollary: To try to coerce behavior through government outside of democratic processes
- To believe that efficiency lowers pollution or depletion, missing that efficiency makes a system produce more of what it already does.
- I’ve written about this fallacy at length. To call it Jevons Paradox mislabels it as an odd quirk that might be fixed with enough attention. Here are a couple posts of mine on it, with one linking to a podcast episode: Technology won’t solve environmental issues and you know it and But Aren’t We Solving Things? How can efficiency increase pollution?
- To believe that people who pollute and deplete with different political views don’t care.
- Hypocrisy: Environmentalists pollute and deplete more than nearly anyone. They accept their excuses for polluting and depleting as heartfelt but dismiss others with the opposite of empathy or compassion.
- Result: If you say about someone who cares that they don’t care, you’ve lost all credibility with them. When they see that you pollute and deplete too, often more than they do, they see you as lacking integrity. Good luck influencing without credibility or integrity.
- Result: You end up mean and mean-spirited. You lead people to vote against you.
