Redstate

Funny, I remember it this way.  Maybe my memory is blurred by the aftereffects of all the drugs.  And, yes, a quick look at the photographs will reveal (a) that people had some really bad haircuts in 1970, and (b) the graphic production quality of protest signs has vastly improved in the last 35 years.

"Earth Day is a holiday designed for the Left.  It is not a holiday for me"

Then stay home.

I never cease to be amazed at the hostility of the conservatives to ecological issues.  One of life's mysteries, I guess.

Cheers -

It may have begun as a leftist holiday, but it has a good purpose that should be addressed by conservatives.  Namely, we need to have policies to help "save" the environment.  There are real negative externalities regarding pollution and other environmental concerns.  We need to show how market solutions help overcome those externalities and why they are better than socialist or liberal ideas on the subject.  

And say we need to save the environment from the environmentalists.

Pave the rest later.

preservation of the planet it not something with which reasonable people can disagree.

My post did not address this desireability; rather, I see an Earth Day which is not used to that end.  To a capitalist, I'd argue, every day is a day for the Earth, in that one cannot profit from a destroyed environment.

If the matter is one of public relations, this so-called Earth Day is predicated on the assumption that conservatives hate the Earth and her environment.  The very recognition of this day is bad P.R. for the movement.

I have to agree.  What's more dangerous to the environment?  A coal-burning power plant that spews hydrogen sulfide gas into the air causing acid rain or a nuclear power plant that produces a small amount of waste that can be placed into barrels and stored in a place desiged for safety?  

Here are a few posters for us "evil conservative" environmentalists courtesy of the Glenn Beck show.

http://www.evilconservatives.com/

but thinking pragmatically, it reinforces those stereotypes to denounce Earth Day at this point.  Instead we should use it to promote our conservationist policies as an alternative to heavy-handed governmental environmentalism.  To make sure I am adding something to the conversation, I refer people to this wonderful Economist article on President Bush and environmentalism (on which he gets surprisingly high marks from Americans).

Yet Mr Bush has a surprising amount of credibility with Main Street America on the subject. A recent Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll found that 49% of Americans approve of his handling of the environment....

In fact, today's cool relationship between conservatism and environmentalism is odd. Surely conservatism has something to do with conserving things? Conservatives like to think that they are second to none in their love of God and Country. But what could be more Godly than good stewardship of the environment? (Just consult Genesis 2:15.) And what could be more patriotic than keeping America beautiful?...

The environmental establishment thinks little of the Clear Skies Act. But it is in a sorry state. The Democratic Party is in danger of becoming associated with "command and control" legislation that is hard to enforce and subject to time-wasting litigation. Younger environmentalists want the movement to stop acting as a single-issue pressure group (which makes sense) and start making common cause with the wider "progressive" movement (which could be political suicide)....

The emergence of a Republican environmentalism would not only be good for the party, but for the environment. The current monopoly of the subject by the Democrats is a triple disaster. It institutionalises policymaking gridlock. It marginalises environmental concerns. And it stultifies useful thinking. The greening of conservatism is a revolution waiting to happen.

One of my centrist, non-political friends who is quite open to both parties was quite enamored with this article.  She fits in the "worried about the religious right and the Michael Moore left" middle ground and environmental concerns are one reason she tends to be left-of-center.  A plausible Republican conservationist platform could help in some Western states like WA and OR and make sure MT and NV don't take a leap to the left.

As I opened the newest Economist, I noticed that the front page is on environmental economics.  Here's a couple market-based quotes for our own Earth Day deliberations:

If environmental groups continue to reject pragmatic solutions and instead drift toward Utopian (or dystopian) visions of the future, they will lose the battle of ideas. And that would be a pity, for the world would benefit from having a thoughtful green movement. It would also be ironic, because far-reaching advances are already under way in the management of the world's natural resources--changes that add up to a different kind of green revolution. This could yet save the greens (as well as doing the planet a world of good)....

Mandate, regulate, litigate." That has been the green mantra. And it explains the world's top-down, command-and-control approach to environmental policymaking. Slowly, this is changing. Yesterday's failed hopes, today's heavy costs and tomorrow's demanding ambitions have been driving public policy quietly towards market-based approaches. One example lies in the assignment of property rights over "commons", such as fisheries, that are abused because they belong at once to everyone and no one. Where tradable fishing quotas have been issued, the result has been a drop in over-fishing. Emissions trading is also taking off. America led the way with its sulphur-dioxide trading scheme, and today the EU is pioneering carbon-dioxide trading with the (albeit still controversial) goal of slowing down climate change....

Whether the big environmental groups join or not, the next green revolution is already under way. Rachel Carson, the crusading journalist who inspired greens in the 1950s and 60s, is joining hands with Adam Smith, the hero of free-marketeers. The world may yet leapfrog from the dark ages of clumsy, costly, command-and-control regulations to an enlightened age of informed, innovative, incentive-based greenery. (emphasis mine)

This is the type of thinking that we should be encouraging.  Some economists have picked up on this need and are offering new perspectives on the issue*.  Ignoring the environment and just demonizing those who advocate top-down governmental environmentalism while offering no alternative makes us a mirror image of the Party of No on social security.

*(Full Disclosure: The auther is a relative of mine)

if the terminology isn't right for your approach, that conservatives co-opt Earth Day, that we remove it from its original definition and plant it (intended) firmly in our own.

If such is possible.  I think the day is too intertwined with socialist principles to be salvaged, but if not their Earth Day, then our own.  

An interesting and curious formulation.  Care to explain your meaning?

Thanks -

What are your thoughts about Amory Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute?  I use their site as a resource for home conservation information, IMO they seem quite friendly to entrepreneurial capitalism.  I'd be curious to know how folks on RS see them.

Thanks -

You seem to be suggesting, and pardon me if the terminology isn't right for your approach, that conservatives co-opt Earth Day

Co-opting Earth Day won't get you much.  Nobody pays that much attention to it anymore, it's kind of just a touchy-feely photo op.  You'd get more out of putting your efforts elsewhere.

There are a fairly wide variety of issues facing the country currently that touch, directly or indirectly, on environmental issues.  As an alternative to either co-opting or making fun of earth day, I would suggest doing some homework and making some constructive suggestions for resolving them.

"Liberals tree huggers" may, in fact, seem clownishly naive, clueless, and ineffectual to you.  They often do to me, as it turns out.  However, they are at least trying to improve something instead of just sneering from the sidelines.

If you'd like to "rescue the environmental movement from the socialists", put something constructive on the table.  Otherwise, stand aside and let folks that at least are interested in doing something step up.

Cheers --