Contra Earth Day

It is fairly commonplace that environmentalism, particularly the environmentalism of global warming,  serves as a  refuge for many on the authoritarian left. With Marxism’s and fascism’s claims and predictions refuted in theory and repeatedly disproved in practice, many such leftists  now find themselves left with the assertion that if given enough power, they will make the weather nicer. The colloquial term for such a person is watermelon – green on the outside and red on the inside.

Such people are dangerous, to be sure, particularly since conservatives often do such poor jobs of opposing them.  It does no good for conservatives to deny that the much of the earth has gotten warmer in  the last hundred and fifty or so years since the end of the Little Ice Age or to deny that carbon dioxide produced by the combustion of fuels contributes to warming. They should accept the facts and instead focus on the valid question of how much such combustion  has contributed to the warming, on the gross exaggerations or absurdity of many of the apocalyptic screeds, and on the fact that nothing in global warming or any other environmental problem justifies or requires the creation of an authoritarian state.  

However these ordinary leftists are not the most significant  threat. They are acting  mainly opportunistically and likely will move on to the next crisis or attempt at justification as soon as anything looking like a better opportunity comes along. The really serious threat comes from the true believers, the people to whom environmentalism has become a religion with a doctrine immune to fact and refutation and with spreading its faith a holy crusade.  They see the unrestrained and comfortable lives enjoyed by Americans as sinful and hope and plan to reduce Americans to lower standards of living and far lower levels of liberty and opportunity. They may seem comical and hard to take seriously as a threat with their demands that people  do such things as stop raising farm animals,   taking showers,  and  washing their clothes, but there is ample evidence that the absurdity of its doctrine or program of action  is no impediment to the success of a fanatical movement. They should be taken seriously. They have already had their successes,  including wielding a fairly large amount of influence with  the present administration in Washington.

Zealous, crusading fanatics are always dangerous, and people who value freedom, civilization, progress, and lives well lived should be aware of what these people want and are trying to do and take action to stop them. 

A Simple Solution

In several cases in recent news, Christian business people such as florists and bakers have gotten in trouble with local authorities for refusing to sell goods and services to weddings between homosexuals. A pizza joint in Indiana was threatened and pressured to close after its owner said she would not want to cater the wedding of a homosexual couple.  In an attempt to turn the tables, a Christian asked various bakeries to produce cakes featuring quotes from the Bible condemning homosexuality and filed complaints with authorities when he was turned down. Presumed mainly Christian sympathizers with the owners of the pizza place raised almost a million dollars for them with an online appeal. Things seem to be both getting hot and being heated up by both conservatives and leftists in the media.

To libertarians the means of dealing with such disputes are  obvious. Simply leave people alone and let them make their own decisions about what they want to do. If a Christian or Muslim baker does not want to bake a cake for the wedding of a homosexual couple,  let him lose the business, and let the people getting married go find a willing vendor and make their purchase from him.  If people find the actions of the baker objectionable and bigoted, let them decide not to patronize his  store and go buy  their cookies and pastries elsewhere.   

That is how such a dispute would be handled in a free and civil society.   In our present environment which is not fully free and far from civil, we often get instead antagonistic groups fighting to use the coercive power of government to make other people obey their dictates.  Such a condition, besides being wrong and violating the rights of the losers, is dangerous for the winners. Political winds change, and a government that can force a Christian to act against his principles today can force someone else to act against his next month or next year.  It is not only more ethical but more prudent to respect and demand respect for the rights of all, including the rights of those who do things one disapproves of.