iGreens too negative
Home ] Bush talks sense on environment ] Campaigns ] Commentary ] Doomsday predictions ] Earthquake News ] Electromagnetic radiation ] Environmental news ] GM stuff ] Fishing ] Forests ] Global warming ] Green watch ] Hunting stuff ] Lomborg ] Mining Industry news ] Miscellaneous ] Mountains ] Planning ] I remember it well ] Nuclear power ] Oil ] People who should know better ] precautionary principle ] Privatisation ] Railways ] Roads ] "Things are getting better" stuff ] Tourism ] Water ] Wind power ]

You have reached iGreens.org.uk.  In December 2006 we moved to iGreens.org with faster servers and discussion boards.  Click here to follow us.  

Home ] Up ]

Hi , - I describe myself as a "left-libertarian".  Like you, I advocate private solutions to the issues I care about, such as environmentalism. 

However I'm writing with a criticism. We want to win liberals over to a philosophy of privatization, not offend them, do we not?  Based on what I've read, your page seems to be dominated by critiques of statism, rather than by promoting privatization solutions to environmental problems.  As long as we continue to make our statement in the negative, criticizing the efforts of environmentalists who promote government solutions, we continue to appear as the "enemy" to most people who care about the environment. When we criticize the statist solutions, the question asked by most liberals is "Well, if we aren't going to regulate/use government funding, how are we going to solve the problem?" We need to have answers.

That is why I believe we need to focus on presenting solutions: private, citizens' solutions, and try to draw people in to our ideas, rather than constantly focussing on our opponents - the statists - and criticising their ideas. As long as we talk about them, we are advertising them. Negative advertising is still advertising. I believe we need to learn from the example of Mary Ruwart. www.ruwart.com .

Actually, I want to compliment you on the article "Private Conservation in Southern Africa".  This is an excellent example of the kind of promotion libertarians who care about issues of concern to the political "left" SHOULD do more.
Charlotte Vanderwolf.  Seattle WA

Editor's reply

Thanks for the criticism.  It really stung.  If that is your perception, we're going wrong big time.  iGreens aim to provide examples of private environmentalism doing better than the state.  To give ammunition to people like us, who are greeted with incredulity when we say that private systems look after the environment better.   Perhaps I'm choosing too many examples of state harm and not enough of private good.  However, I think you are a bit harsh.  The following all include praise for the private sector.

Beaches, record number of clean.

Ducks Unlimited - going wrong

Gopher tortoise conservation bank

German private railways

Falling CO2 emissions despite no Kyoto

Meanwood beck and the crayfish

Reforestation in China

Salmon conservation in Scotland

Oyster beds

Porpoises in river Aire

Southern Africa, private conservation in

Shell and Development Projects in Nigeria

Masai Mara, private conservancy in

Nevertheless your main point is well taken. Government harm is all around us and regularly reported, albeit not usually recognised. The private sector doing good is mostly ignored.  Hope you like our new mission statement!

The Editor

Editor's note - Charlotte publishes a newsletter "The Left-Libertarian Reader" in Seattle, WA. Its mission is to do just what she describes . . draw liberals in to our ideas and show them what we're doing RIGHT!  Anyone interested, please email us and we'll send your request on.

Home ] Up ]

You have reached iGreens.org.uk.  In December 2006 we moved to iGreens.org with faster servers and discussion boards.  Click here to follow us.  

Send mail to enquiries@igreens.org.uk  with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: September 20, 2006