In Praise of Anti-Environmentalism: Challenging the Ideology of Greenism, By James Reed

The environmental movement, often labelled "greenism" when tied to progressive ideologies, has become a dominant force in global politics, pushing aggressive policies like net zero targets and stringent conservation measures. While these initiatives supposedly aim to address climate change and environmental degradation, they frequently ignore economic realities, individual freedoms, and practical trade-offs. Anti-environmentalism, a growing counter-movement, does not reject environmental care but challenges the dogmatic, one-dimensional approach of greenism. I argue that anti-environmentalism is a necessary response to greenism's contradictions, offering a pragmatic path that balances human prosperity with environmental stewardship. As it should be for a sane and rational society.

Greenism's policies, such as carbon taxes and renewable energy mandates, often impose significant economic burdens. For instance, aggressive transitions to wind and solar energy require substantial subsidies and infrastructure investments, driving up energy costs. In 2024, countries like Germany faced electricity prices as high as €0.45 per kWh, straining households and businesses. These costs disproportionately impact working-class communities, who face higher living expenses without the means to absorb them. Anti-environmentalism argues for a balanced energy strategy, leveraging reliable fossil fuels and nuclear rather than a premature manic adoption of so-called renewables, with its social destruction.

Moreover, greenism's regulatory overreach, such as bans on single-use plastics or mandates for electric vehicles, disregards practical realities. Alternatives to plastics, like biodegradable materials, can be costlier and less effective, while electric vehicle production relies on environmentally damaging mining practices. Anti-environmentalism champions market-driven innovation, such as improved recycling technologies or cleaner fossil fuel methods, to address environmental concerns without sacrificing economic vitality or consumer choice.

Greenism's rhetoric is riddled with inconsistencies that fuel anti-environmentalist sentiment. Proponents often oscillate between apocalyptic warnings of climate catastrophe, the eternal "10 years to save the planet" BS, and dismissive attitudes toward adaptation strategies, like resilient infrastructure or advanced agricultural techniques. This alarmism alienates the public, especially when high-profile environmentalists advocate for policies that disrupt livelihoods while indulging in carbon-intensive lifestyles, such as private jet travel to climate summits; the Davos tribe for example. Such hypocrisy undermines greenism's credibility.

Additionally, greenism's framing as a moral imperative ignores its elitist undertones. Policies like net zero are often presented as universal goods, yet they disproportionately burden working-class communities. For example, while Western nations push decarbonisation, countries like China continue to rely on fossil fuels to power economic growth, highlighting the inequity of global environmental expectations, and anti-Westernism and pro-communism. Anti-environmentalism exposes these contradictions, advocating for policies that value fairness and practicality over Leftist ideological purity.

Anti-environmentalism resonates with populist movements because it rejects the perceived Leftist elitism of greenism. In the UK, parties like Reform UK have gained traction by critiquing environmental mandates as out-of-touch with ordinary citizens' needs. Similarly, in the US, political figures have dismantled environmental protections while claiming to support clean air and water, reflecting a "cold" environmentalism that values nature as a spectacle rather than a cause for radical upheaval. This stance appeals to voters who feel alienated by green policies that threaten jobs in industries like manufacturing or agriculture.

However, anti-environmentalism is not merely reactionary. It acknowledges public support for environmental protection, but demands solutions that align with everyday realities. Rather than denying environmental challenges, it calls for pragmatic approaches, such as investing in adaptive technologies or supporting conservation efforts that don't undermine economic growth.

Anti-environmentalism offers a corrective to greenism's excesses by valuing human welfare alongside environmental health. It advocates for innovation-driven solutions, such as advanced nuclear energy, which can reduce emissions without destabilising economies. It also emphasises local, voluntary conservation efforts over top-down mandates, empowering communities to protect their environments without sacrificing their livelihoods.

This approach contrasts with greenism's tendency to universalise Western environmental priorities, often ignoring the "survivalist" environmentalism emerging in regions like Africa and Asia, where extreme weather because of natural climatic variability and resource scarcity (NOT climate change) demand practical solutions. By focusing on achievable, equitable policies, anti-environmentalism bridges the gap between environmental care and human progress.

And now for balance, a comment from the "other side," to see what we are up against. The Leftism is too depressing to quote!

https://phys.org/news/2025-05-anti-environmentalism-full-contradictions.html