Green Newt and Sore-Winner Environmentalists

Unfortunately, being green, like eating organic whole food, is too often a self-identifier for people who want to think of themselves as the superior, elite cutting edge.

Much like people who love an obscure author or musician and get apolplectic when the object of their admiration gets mainstream recognition.

"In other words, when it comes to politics, politics is more important than metaphysics." - And as seen on the Bush-hatred thread, when it comes to metaphysics, politics is still more important.

Generally I agree with you, Rod. In fact, I am writing a paper that tries to convince my fellow environmentalists to do a better job of hooking up with potential allies within conservatism. Actually, my experience is that the smarter environmentalists and enviro groups (Environmental Defense, for example) do in fact craft strategic alliances with fellow travelers on the Right. Example: here in Oregon, enviros fighting construction of a casino in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic area formed a coalition with Religious Right groups that were opposed to gambling generally. Another example: Gordon Durnil (author of The Making of a Conservative Environmentalist and a founder of Young Americans for Freedom) was welcomed within the environmental movement and spoke to many enviro conferences. Smart politicking. But yes, there are other enviros (or perhaps more accurately, doctrinaire liberals masquerading as enviros) who simply won't have anything to do with anyone right of center.

I could add a couple more examples to Bill's list: environmentalists in western states learned decades ago that they could form powerful alliances with hunting groups to oppose logging and mining. And clean air advocates have allied, to everyone's profit, with various medical advocacy groups.

There is no knee-jerk reaction among enviros to oppose conservatives with whom they share interests. The hostile reaction to Newt is occuring because he does not, in fact, share their interests. Newt's policies would perpetuate global warming, and the fact that he (unlike most conservatives) acknowledges the basic science here does not make his recommendations here any less damaging.

I have my quibbles with his program, but Newt does make this good point:

Unless you can create economically desirable, environmentally positive technologies, you are never going to get China and India to adopt.

I don't see those two countries jumping on the GHG-reduction bandwagon anytime soon, so long as doing so costs lots of money. Indeed, if I were in charge of China or India, I'd secretly rejoice if the West saddled itself with an economically-costly CO2-reduction regime; it would give Western companies one more incentive to outsource operations to Chinese or Indian shores. Regulation only works with enforcement. How does one conduct "enforcement" against China or India?

Somebody affiliated with Center For American Progress giving no quarter to Newt Gingrich? Why would he do such a thing...

Rod,

I can't blame environmentalists for being wary of Gingrich. I think their reaction, while perhaps unproductive, is perfectly understandable and natural. After all, if Planned Parenthood announced a serious plan to "make abortion rare" (even if said plan involved using ways approved social conservatives) I'd have a hard time believing it because of my overwhelming negative views of Planned Parenthood. Rightly or wrongly, I think suspicion of "the other side" is only natural.

rr

I don't have time to follow the article's links, but he's apparently got a fairly extensive and documented list of reasons to believe that many of Newt's solutions fall well short of the challenge. He's also got some reason to think Newt may be agreeing with environmentalists not in the sense of reaching the same conclusion (environmental issues are very important) by different means, but rather voicing the same conclusion without meaning it. Which seems like a more common example of "politics."

I like some of Newt's suggestions, but I am extremely skeptical that technological innovation will do much without massive govt expenditures on new infrastructure in conjunction with a wise combination of government subsidies and regulation to encourage both technology and conservation. Even that might not be enough. I think we'll actually have to change our lifestyles rather than gradually transition from one energy source to another. If thats the case, the question is do we change gradually because we see the problems coming, or do we wait until the excrement hits the fan?

"the left has a free-range cow"

ONE blogger on the left had a cow, Rod. And rightly so, considering Newt's grasp of the issue.

Besides, didn't you identify youself as alligned with the "left" on another thread??? ;{O)

Rod, many of us on the "environmental left" distrust Newt because of his past. He has shown himself quite willing to say whatever it takes to get elected. This last minute conversion to a green position needs to have some works behind it before it can be accepted as real.

After all, it was James who said that our works should reflect our faith, was it not? Let Newt do some work to reflect the truth of what he says. Then he deserves to be trusted as sincere. Until then, it's just words Rod...just words.

After all, you probably would not trust Hillary if she suddenly started talking like a religious conservative, would you?

The last thing you want to do is bring the Apostles into a debate about Liberal and Progressive ideology. The Apostles wrote papers opposing these people before the neologims describing their 21st century incarnations were invented. And, for those that think riches are the way to happiness:

What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don't they come from your desires that battle within you? You want something but don't get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight. You do not have, because you do not ask God. When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.

You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. Or do you think Scripture says without reason that the spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely? But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble."

Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.

Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?