Replies

I always categorize environmentalists by whether they have an agenda or not.

The ones who are closely aligned with the left, (Sierra Club Etc.) seem not to care so much about the environment as to whether it helps socialist causes. (Let the forests take care of themselves, don't log; this saves money for other social programs and makes housing expensive so the poor need to rely on government subsidies.) These you call watermelons, but I have not heard that slogan.

Then there are the other kind like the recyclers who separate their waste glass not realizing that the recycling centers just dump the glass in a land fill because it really is cheaper to make glass from sand, and there is a lot of sand available for glassmaking.

Thus one group is out to destroy capitalism, believing like Nader that it will lead to a ruinous world. Of course this group is used by the marx loving crowd and is aligned with the democratic coalition. The other group simply lacks understanding, and likes to go with the flow. This "feel good" group would well be served by Crichton's call for better environmental science, because they really believe MTBE is good for the world (as opposed to a harmful subsidy for big oil), and they worry that the oceans are rising not mindful of the fact that Holland is below sea level and has been for years. This group believes that fuel cell will save us without considering the environmental cost of making fuel cells and generating and distributing hydrogen.

I have not thought of capitalists as a sub group, but you are right when they use environmental images in their advertising, attempting to create good will for their industries.

Of course nomenclature is important in classification. I'm surprised that you are not acquainted with "watermelon". Green(environmental) on the outside, red(socialistic) on the inside. Environmental morphs into environmental justice and becomes linked to social justice.

Those you mention in regard to seperating their garbage are known as the "self-decievers". The fact that curbside recycling is an economic net-loss to the environment is well documented most notably by libertarian Lynn Scarlett, former President of the Reason Foundation and now working in the Bush administration as Undersecretary of Policy and Budget at the Interior Dept. But you see, curbside recycling makes these people feel good about themselves. With that in mind, they could alternatively be called the "feel-gooders", which would make the a sub-set of the do-gooders".

Those that think that the un-attended forest will revert to pristine are known as the "benign neglectors".

I'm afraid that my previous grouping "Capitalist" is lacking. It is possible the the "capitalists" should be a sub-group of those that have an economic self-interest in promoting environmentalism. The Teamsters could hardly be called an environmental group yet they joined with environmental and social justice groups in the lawsuit over the environmental inpact of admitting Mexican trucks to the US, which would impact the earnings of the individual teamster and the political power of the Teamster Union. Another sub-group here would be the the NIMBY who really cares nothing about the environment but is opposed to development because of a percieved loss of his property value.

Perhaps I have opened a can of worms that would be best left to someone with 7 researchers and a $75,000.00 budget.