Not all environmentalists are green extremists

Michael Berliner’s harangue against environmentalists should be used as an example of how to construct a straw man for your argument (Thursday commentary). His portrayal of all environmentalists as nature-loving man haters bent on the “demolition of technological/industrial civilization” may make for a convenient enemy to criticize. The plain fact is, however, that the vast majority of people who consider themselves environmentalists do not hold these beliefs.

The truth is environmentalists embrace technological solutions to environmental problems. Environmental engineers have produced numerous technologies which have made our water cleaner, and our air safer to breathe. Automobiles, for example, now come equipped with emission control systems that reduce the harmful effects of burning gasoline. I am grateful that environmentalists pushed legislation that required manufacturers to embrace these technologies.

Mr. Berliner also argues that environmentalists place a greater value on the rights of animals and trees than on the rights of humans to improve the quality of their lives. Again he relies on his straw man, quoting a couple of what he calls “consistent environmentalists” who say the world might be better off without humans. I’m not sure why these people are “consistent,” but I suspect it is because their extreme views are consistent with Mr. Berliner’s straw man.

Debates over development, logging, oil exploration and other environmental issues actually reflect differing visions of how to improve the quality of human life. I and others like me see a need to balance economic development with environmental preservation. We do so not because trees have inherent rights of their own. Rather, we believe that wild forests and the animals within them add to the quality of our lives. The opportunity to explore these resources adds an element of wonder to our human experience.

As with other public policy questions, reasonable people can disagree on what to do. That doesn’t make them bad people. It is the essence of our democracy that we debate questions such as these to arrive at a common good. The common good is best served when people of differing opinions honestly try to understand each other. I fear Mr. Berliner has no interest in understanding what mainstream environmentalists have to say. Instead he prefers to brand them all as confederates of the extremists representing only a tiny fraction of those of us favoring environmental protection.

Maybe what Mr. Berliner needs most is to take a slow, deep breath of the cleaner air we now breathe thanks to technologies brought about by environmentalists, and relax.

Shan Nelson-Rowe

HENDERSON