I've not seen the report, but it seems to give folks another excuse to ignore acting responsibly.
******** Jolly green giant hypocrites: Tree huggers leave the biggest carbon footprint
I'm not the only one who comes down hard on the tree-hugging hypocrites of the silly "green" movement. According to research published in the UK's left-leaning Guardian newspaper, the "greenies" who are most likely to recycle their garbage, start compost heaps in their yard, and go to great lengths to make their homes more energy efficient are THE SAME people who are most likely to take frequent, long-haul flights abroad. Oh, and just in case you need me to spell it out for you, those long trips by jet airplanes spew many times the amount of carbon emissions into the atmosphere than the feeble home-made "greening" efforts could ever hope to off-set.
Stuart Barr, the leader of this hilarious research out of Exeter University concluded that, "Green living is largely something of a myth. There is a middle class environmentalism where being green is part of the desired image. But another part of the desired image is to fly off skiing twice a year." Some of these "do as I say, not as I do" hypocrites even said they DESERVED to fly as much as they want as a - get this - reward for their planet-conscious behavior! These people are parodies of themselves. I have no intention of taking political, social, or ethical direction from hypocrites such as these - and neither should you. **snip**
William Campbell Douglass II, M.D. Copyright (c)2008 by www.douglassreport.com, L.L.C.
Another PR Problem for Supporters of Sustainability
Sign in or Sign up to comment
I find it offensive. The purpose of the list serve is to share strategies, not to question the whole point of what we're doing.
Liz Goldman
Dover NH
Member, Dover Energy Committee
I am glad that I and the "tree hugging greenies" with whom I associate here in the United States have all worked to curtail our flight travel. We have done this by building high quality lives where we are, creating family-like bonds with our friends, taking "staycations," and keeping in touch with important people far away from us electronically while reserving travel for sporadic mandatory family occasions only. I question what this supposed "research" conducted by the Guardian was. Sounds like opinion-based reporting at best, by someone who already thinks the green movement is silly. I personally think wantonly using more resources than we need, contaminating resources that sustain us and arrogantly thinking we could possibly predict the outcomes of incredibly stupid development strategies is silly too, but who am I to criticize?
Rebekah Greenwald
Director of Education
Apeiron Institute for Sustainable Living
17 Gordon Avenue, Suite 207
Providence, RI 02905
401-228-7930
www.apeiron.org
[email protected]
The perspective below evokes such a categorical condemnation and even contempt for self-professed community activists who embrace environmentalism, while deriving pleasure from their debunking, ironically, within hint hint "left-leaning" media, begs the question "what interest its author can derive from being part of a list serv dedicated to sustainability and diversity. If "greenwashing" is the point of the critique, then it seems to me that there are better ways of articulating it without trivializing the efforts of thousands of well-meaning citizens. A link to the Guardian article, which I could not find, would have been helpful in order to judge its tone or indeed the merits of the research in question that has provoked such outrage and derision, although I suspect, the research provided confirmation of pre-existing beliefs.
Michel Casselman
Sustainable Development Co-ordinator
Department of Justice
Ottawa Canada
There appears to be some support for the view that a certain a section of society is taking some small (home) sustainability measures but then believing that they've 'done their bit' then continue to live their normal energy/carbon intensive lives. This is something of a problem. But this does not ness. represent the activities of those folks who are more committed to sustainability (in this case described as 'tree-huggers'). Using that study to tar 'tree-huggers' with the same brush as the 'token greens' is misrepresenting the situation. Not that the denial movement could ever be accused of misrepresentation . . .
I suggest that we all read Hot, Flat & Crowded by Tom Friedman. He may be one of those folks that take a lot of long flights, but his research seems to be substantial and convincing. Like it or not, we all need to think about every choice we make for the sake of our children and grandchildren. Our current course is totally unsustainable and whatever new course we take it must have something in it for everyone across the world. Tom has thrown down the gauntlet and we all need to run through it and get a little battered but come out the other end leaner, meaner and stronger.
Gary Fish
Manager, Pesticide Programs
Maine Board of Pesticides Control
28 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0028
207-287-7545
207-624-5020 fax
http://www.ThinkFirstSprayLast.org
http://www.YardScaping.org
"I want to rename "green." I want to rename it geostrategic, geoeconomic, capitalistic and patriotic. I want to do that because I think that living, working, designing, manufacturing and projecting America in a green way can be the basis of a new unifying political movement for the 21st century." - Tom Friedman
No matter how sceptical we may be I thought the listserv was about sharing and learning. We learn in many ways and one is to question what we are doing. No one has to agree but topics like this certainly stimulate the mind.
Syd Smith
Turramurra
NSW AUSTRALIA
Even small changes can make a difference if they lead to larger collective changes. Wise individual decisions about everyday daily actions are vital to long term sustainability. This is at the heart of CBSM approaches.
John Feint
ACT Natural Resource Management Council
Australia
To whom it may concern:
I noticed a few months ago a forwarded article from Mel Tremper regarding a British program directed at raising environmental awareness in children that had a "eco-cop" motif. If I recall correctly, the notion that this program was fascistic was declared. No fewer than two people responded in support of the program, and I was confused by the intent behind sharing such an email with this list. I decided to look more closely at this email sent by Mel, and I would like to share a few notes that speak to the quality and relevance of the initial post regarding
"Jolly green giant hypocrites: Tree huggers leave the biggest carbon footprint"
1. I could not read the report, which I did try to find two ways. I went to the douglassreport website after no results popped up from googling the title.
2. Access to the archive required a login for which I didn't feel compelled to register.
3. I question the motives and veracity of the website as the articles seemed dubious (***Men: You can extend your lovemaking and shift your sex life into overdrive. * is one of the titles on the home page).
Moreover, Stuart Barr's departmental biography pageon The University of Exeter's web site suggests his interest is in contributing or providing value to the environmental movement - not, as the article states, as being "the leader of this hilarious research." I speculate that one aspect of the mission of such a research project would be to assess baselines from which changes can be measured. That some people who self-identify as interested in sustainability are called hypocrites is not shocking - not because they are "greenies" but because they are human. Furthermore, could it be that this segment represents progress nevertheless? That is, perhaps the other people on those flights with whom the "greenies" go skiing twice a year have yet to implement some of the measures cited which may mean that these "hypocrites" provide trending evidence more towards sustainability. How does sharing this bit of editorial further the mission of "fostering sustainable behavior?" How does this report give others an "excuse to ignore acting responsibly?" My understanding of this list is that is intended to support sustainability. I, for one, have found the "eco-cop" = fascistic and the "jolly green hypocrites" to be antagonistic to this cause. My sincere apologies to anyone who considers this email a waste. As to avoid cluttering everyone's inbox, I can be reached directly at [email protected] for anyone who cares to share their two cents on this. That may help me decide if I am on the right list or not.
Jim Conlon