Dr Thomas DiLorenzo, author of The Real Lincoln and Lincoln Unmasked, was recently a guest on The Robert Wenzel Show. One of the subjects which DiLorenzo and Wenzel discussed (see the audio excerpt below) was the difference between conservationism and environmentalism. DiLorenzo noted that while conservationists are genuinely concerned about preserving habitats and solving environmental problems, environmentalists are essentially socialist ideologues who want to destroy economic liberty. He went on to talk about the lack of economic understanding of environmentalists and how many old-style socialists embraced the environmentalist movement as a way of achieving their political goals.
This distinction which Dr DiLorenzo articulates tends to hold up when contrasting traditional Southerners (who tend to be deeply attached to the soil and nature) to the very ideologically-driven environmentalists (who often come from big cities or heavily populated suburbs outside of the South). Hunters and fishermen, for example, who are often demonised and viciously attacked by environmentalists, contribute vast sums of money, time and effort towards preserving natural habitats. They have a stake in maintaining animal populations and a healthy environment in which they can flourish. Meanwhile, many urban-dwelling environmentalists try to take the moral high ground on the issue even though they are thoroughly detached from the natural world and contribute comparatively little to actual conservationism. How does the emotional and quasi-religious manner in which political-environmentalism is promoted in public schools and the US mass media actually help? It doesn’t. A pragmatic and non-political approach to real conservationism does much more good than holding a protest for TV cameras or putting an environmentalist bumper sticker on your Prius.
Click here for the audio (duration: 4:21)