This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Confessions of an Environmental Blogger

Does care for environmental issues dictate one's political philosophies?

It happens often enough.  While discussing topics environmental, I become a victim of stereotype.  Maybe someone will begin a sentence with “We progressives...”  Or, depending on the political leanings on the other side of the conversation, I get scolded with “You (insert expletive here) progressives...”  Apparently, because the non-human environment and its ultimate fate is a passion of mine, it is assumed I walk around in a Che t-shirt and Birkenstock sandals with dreams of a Marxist “utopia” in my mind.  While I appreciate the craftsmanship of Birkenstocks and don’t have anything against them, I just don’t happen to own a pair.  As for Che and Marx, well, I don’t respect anything about their teachings.  You see, I am (gasp, dare I say it) an independent, right-of-center moderate that believes environmental issues are best solved with a heavy dose of free-market tools balanced with necessary, but limited, regulation - all while respecting private property rights.  

Okay, the above tale of stereotype woe is a bit extreme. It is not always assumed that I’m a bleeding heart radical planning to Occupy Red Bank.  But, it is typically assumed that to be pro-environment I must lean to the left, that I believe Al Gore is an environmental genius, and that I think we need more environmental regulation.  The first two assumptions are completely wrong, and the third is not necessarily true.  For as I see it, beginning on the far left, socialist policies and communal living are probably the worst enemies of the environment. Look no further than the legacy left behind by the former Soviet Union.  Moving back towards the center, but remaining on the left, I still see an over reliance on top-down bureaucratic control and unnecessary market interference.  

On the flip side, there is the anti-environment stigma associated with the right, especially as you move away from the center.  The origin is pretty obvious.  From prominent conservatives that deny the rate of atmospheric greenhouse gas change can affect the environment, to those that question the age of the earth and reject firm geologic, chemical, and physical evidence about the same, to shrill cries of “Drill, Baby Drill.”  There is plenty of fodder here for the environmental community to vilify.   

Ultimately though, the typically conservative-branded concepts of private property and free markets offer our best hope for environmental repair and regeneration.  When property is privately owned, in this day and age, it is maintained in order to hold its value.  It is the shared spaces (rivers, ground water, federal grazing lands, air space, etc.) that receive the environmental abuse.  However, coupled with targeted regulation, free market policies including cost internalization of environmental harms can help avoid this so called Tragedy of the Commons.   In this sense, if we actually include environmental costs in the price of a product, the consumer can readily identify environmental impacts by looking at the price tag, decide with their wallet, and move us towards the best, most efficient environmentally-friendly solution.  Among other things, this means no more subsidized oil, no more market-shunning transportation policies like free parking, and no more artificial pricing of imports from faraway lands with dubious environmental track records.  A politically disastrous and globally difficult platform to maintain - yes.  But ultimately necessary.   

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?