Environmentalism and ‘saving the world’ are almost exclusively preoccupations of the left. Outwardly they are noble pursuits, and yet they have always smelt a bit rotten. In order to find the source of the odor it is necessary to look beneath the surface and understand what is going on at the psychological level when someone takes up these causes. Clues are few and far between, so when you find something in the press that hints at a deeper malaise, it’s worth looking at it very closely.
The following comment by English journalist Geoffrey Wheatcroft is one such. He said:
“The great twin political problems of the age are the brutality of the right and the dishonesty of the left.”
By far the more straightforward of the two is the ‘brutality of the right’ and it can be explained by pretty much any of us. For example if I were to summarise my approach to life it would go something like this: “Normally I try to treat other people with respect, but essentially I am selfish and that is what normally guides my actions. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.” In essence that’s it – the brutality of the right flows from our selfishness. Most of you will relate.
It’s Wheatcroft’s second ‘problem’ that is the clue to what is wrong with environmentalism that we really want to look at. If we drill down into what is meant by the ‘dishonesty of the left’ we eventually come to the concept of ‘pseudo-idealism’. Pseudo-idealism is not real idealism, its feel-good selfishness masquerading as idealism. The vast majority of environmentalists belong to this camp: they preach their cause not from a genuine concern for the environment, but from a genuine concern for feeling good about themselves.
The psychology behind it is that we are all variously embattled at one level or another, and so ‘do-gooding’ can be massively seductive because it is so guilt relieving.
However – and here is the danger – in order to get the full guilt relieving benefit from ‘do-gooding’ (or any of the myriad forms of political correctness including environmentalism), the practitioner has to delude themselves that they are not on a selfish trip. In most cases this is so patently absurd that they have to work very hard at maintaining it. As a result they can become not just a strident advocate, but fanatical and intolerant of others who continue to battle.
This is dangerous because such intolerance is repressive and in essence anti-progress; and I don’t just mean economic progress – at a deeper level this intolerance is repressive of all progress.
In Nineteen Eighty Four George Orwell said, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face”. If that future isn’t now, it is very close. Political correctness has become so pervasive in all its various guises that the boot may as well have a ‘dolphin friendly’ stamp on it, and as for the face – well we aren’t allowed to discuss its race or its gender or even its age can we – but I can guess it looks pretty much like you and me.
So the dishonesty of the left is manifold – it deludes it’s self that it is selfless when in fact it is extremely selfish; and its insistence we all ‘do good’ masks a threat far more dangerous than the brutality of the right.
Jake is a writer who is interested in rationally understanding humanity and our world. He likes to read and is constantly try to make sense of the deeper reasoning behind our actions.
He thinks one of the most critical issues facing humanity is pseudo idealism and considers it a serious responsibility we humans have to stand up to the political correct dogma and fundamentalism that is sweeping the world at present.
PERFECT!
This perfectly explains ”Earth Hour,” which is harder on our energy grid than not doing it would be.
It perfectly explains the Prius and other cars that pollute in their making more than they can ever make up for; which cannot pay for themselves through energy savings for so many years as to not be worth buying, which, if popular would bring down the electrical grid, which 3 out of 4 owners would definitely never buy again.
It perfectly explains the idea of never touching nature when a light touch can do so much!
(Like eradicating the tree rust beetle before it killed so many trees in So Cal that the whole place was dead and tinder dry, even the dead trees were saved from being felled!)
This is what drives all of liberalism. I’ve seen it called “selfless-narcissism.”
Many Americans who are not rabid worshipers at the altars of environmental extremism, also care greatly about protecting our environment. Many of them are conservative, some are moderates, others are Libertarian, Farmers, ranchers, children of the Scouts, conservationists, etc…
The ‘Chicken Little’ Eco-fascists do not own environmentalism. They simply have taken claim to the term and turned it into a form of fanatic religious extremism.
(On a side issue regarding environmental protection Americans still don’t know where to safely dispose of expired mercury containing CFL’s that these far-left politicos foisted on us.)
@Ditto:
Ditto you noted there are ”conservationists” as well as ”environmentalists.”
The gap between the two is wide.
I am a conservationist.
I and NOT an environmentalist.
I don’t believe in a useless showy display of consciousness-raising actions such as Earth Hour or Earth Day, driving a Prius or poison light bulbs.
I do REAL stuff.
Oddly (ironically even) I am well recognized for my works by these nutcases.
Hence, I was awarded LB’s Earth Day prize a couple years ago!
Heh!
PS See this great tool for calculating if you should buy that new car over the one you now have:
http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2006/04/should-you-trade-in-your-gas-guzzler.html
I remember seeing environmental protesters warming themselves in a corporate building heated by natural gas.
Not long ago, I remember the very reverend Jesse Jackson Sr. preaching about global worming and the benefits of purchasing hot air on the Chicago Climate Exchange. I wonder if he has a piece of that action.
I read on Rush’s website that he’s now accused of sweetening his environment by having an affair with an attorney that ran a pro boner defense office for the Rainbow Push Coalition. Its also stated there that she single handedly stimulated the coalition and is a Fox contributor.Her name is Holder.( I’ve paraphrased a little. )
Rush, you’re the greatest.
So, the “brutality of the right” is really nothing more than naked self interest, but that’s okay. The “dishonesty of environmentalism” is nothing more than “feel-good selfishness masquerading as idealism,” but that’s somehow less acceptable that naked self interest?
The hallmark of ethical thought is in recognizing our personal obligations to something greater than merely satisfying our own personal desires. To view ourselves otherwise suggests that we have no other purpose than achieving our own ends, regardless of the impact our decisions may have on our family, community or those who will follow us through life in the future.
Mr. Cunningham’s description fits the motivation of the Left’s “useful idiots” perfectly, but going back to Mr. Wheatcroft’s original quote, I would interpret to referring to the brutality of the extreme right of the political spectrum which is basically no government at all, the only laws are the laws of nature. Every man and beast for themselves. Very few normal minded humans (if there are any left…) really want such an existence. The dishonesty of the left is the pretense that they are purely motivated by the desire to provide a better life for the people. The “useful idiots” are just those who fall for the shtick. The ultimate goal is always total government control of all a nation’s wealth (production). Environmentalism can be an effective method of achieving that goal. As history shows, government control of wealth (production) always results in a ruling class of, at most, 10 percent who have a decent life and everyone else in dire poverty. And that’s where Wheatcroft is shortsighted (or perhaps “dishonest”, as most journalists do seem to be on the left…), because the need to maintain control of those in dire poverty usually results in brutality which leaves most longing for the more compassionate laws of nature.
some of the most selfish people on the planet are liberals.
it is a FACT that leftists give less in charity.
it is a fact that liberal/leftist agendas result in poverty and death but they never take responsibility for their failures or change course in future endeavors based on objective analyses of failed programs.
instead they double down.
example
welfare and the great society locked generations into poverty instead of helping them.
leftists still refuse to see this.
banning ddt murdered millions in africa,
leftist solution fucking mosquito nets…
the list is endless.
the soft tyrrany of doogooder leftists is priming the powder keg with the next sacred leftist notion, no borders and unrestricted immigration unfettered illegal and legal immigration to the west especially of muslims who hate western civilization and are colonists not immigrants. a culture has a right to survive in its home turf and be dominant that is being chalenged in the UK and much of europe with muslim immigration and it will eventually explode.
yes the soft tyranny of doogooder leftists will eventually put shackles on us all if they are not repudiated and thrown out.
Worth Repeating:
“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis
You obviously know nothing about the psychology of the right or the left.
@SkippingDog:
You are wrong, and guilty of placing emphasis on the extreme, instead of the norm. Someone who is pursuing their own desires does not necessarily mean that the person has relegated family, community, or future generations to the back burner. There are countless examples of people the liberal/progressives would demonize as being “selfish”, simply for the “crime” of creating wealth, that have very healthy family and community relationships, who have given more time and energy to the betterment of their family and community, as well as making things better for future generations.
A man living to better himself and his own life, with his own hand, gives those around him, in his family, in his community, and in future generations, a better life. Those who wish to better their own lives, by thieving off of others, make no one’s life better.