The Shotgun Blog
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Free and green
The Western Standard has added another columnist to its roster--this time, it's Dr. Glenn Fox, natural resource economist at the University of Guelph, and one of the few, but growing, pro-free market academics working on environmental issues. His first column for the Standard titled "Free and green," pokes a hole in Arthur Cecil Pigou's famous "trains and sparks" example used to show the necessity of government intervention to promote environmental outcomes.
"To many people, including many of my students at the beginning of the semester, the words "Free Market Environmentalism" appear to not belong together, like "Military Intelligence," "Business Ethics," "Government Efficiency," or "University Innovation." One student proposed that, to resolve the conflictedness of that phrase, I should write it as "Free Market ≠ Environmentalism." I expect that this view is held by many Canadians." Read more...
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Free and green:
Free markets and environmentalism DO NOT belong together.
Free markets and Conservation belong together.
Environmentalism is a movement started by and supported by the Soviet Union and is a Communist vehicle to hobble the industry of the Free West to prevent technological advance and keep us from arming ourselves to defend against the aggressive spread of World Communism.
Posted by: Speller | 2008-02-20 3:44:41 PM
Great theory Speller. Did you go to the same school as Harper?
Posted by: RevenueNeutral | 2008-02-20 4:59:50 PM
No, I've never lived in Toronto.
Posted by: Speller | 2008-02-20 5:03:06 PM
Well stated Speller and totally correct. No, RN, it is not a theory but factual. Do the research before making brain-dead comments.
Posted by: Alain | 2008-02-20 5:09:51 PM
Another new writer for this blog?
It's now official ... Western Standard blog has more writers than readers.
Re Speller's comment ... he's right, environmentalism is the (not so) new front to fight capitalism.
If they win out in the end, we will all starve to death in a pristine world.
Posted by: John West | 2008-02-20 5:35:08 PM
Speller.. Is it ironic then that the last poke from the Soviets was handing over an East Germany so badly polluted it will cost billions to clean up?
Posted by: dp | 2008-02-21 10:21:21 AM
Not any more ironic or hypocritical than the Comintern being behind the Trade Unions but not permitting unions in the Soviet Union.
Or the Comintern being behind the 'Peace Movement' but not permitting a peace movement in the Soviet Union.
Or the Comintern being behind many of the Human Rights or Equal Rights organizations while the Soviet Union was annually among the top Human Rights and Equal Rights violators.
Or the Comintern being behind the Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament movement while the Soviet Union was arming to the teeth and not allowing a similar movement to exist behind the Iron Curtain.
What is really ironic is that Russia, which really was THE Soviet Union, merely had to do what many Multinational Corporations did in the 1990s, which was to downsize and cut the unprofitable subsidiaries that were hobbling them, get lean and mean, and reopen under new management and Voila'.... the West Unilaterally declares the Cold War is over, that the West has won, and Mother Russia continues fighting her side of the Cold War with all of the doors which the West previously closed to her now miraculously open.
Russia's minions and proxies are still at the same old game and we had better wake up to the fact that the Cold War never ended or it really will end when we are sufficiently weakened and the Cold War becomes a Hot War or chain of revolutions or domino effect of traitorous leaders simply voting us being on the losing side.
Posted by: Speller | 2008-02-21 10:46:47 AM
I would say you're probably thinking conservation vs. preservation rather than conservation vs. environmentalism. Free-market environmentalism isn't a new concept, it's nice to see it breaking into the mainstream a bit more. Hopefully one day it comes into public debate enough that we can say, "Ha! Take that, Suzuki!"
Posted by: Janet | 2008-02-21 1:20:38 PM
Environmentalism is a socialist concept that has attained the status of religion.
The socialists will never leave the drivers seat nor will they allow capitalists to be the navigator.
Socialists never cooperate in good faith.
"The goal of socialism is communism."
2 CORINTHIANS Chapter 6
14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
Posted by: Speller | 2008-02-21 1:30:08 PM
Some very good posts.
Now that we all realize that the left are communists and the right has been taken over by the left, where does that leave us?
The right is wrong and the left is stupid.We need a libertarian party.
Posted by: Veteran | 2008-02-21 1:40:09 PM
Libertarian Party might be a good idea. The left and the right must believe first and formost in populism and they both lead to big government. The left wants to take care of you and the right wants to protect you.
Janet, free market environmentalism is fine by me if it means the market is truly free, not forced to do anything by anyone. They could call it whatever they want.
Posted by: TM | 2008-02-21 5:11:04 PM
>"They could call it whatever they want."
TM | 21-Feb-08 5:11:04 PM
Good idea, TM.
Maybe the Left will start calling Communism, Free Market Communism, make it more palatable to the Conservative/Libertarian types and to put the cherry on top say it's "revenue neutral" and it's going to mean more money in your pocket.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
What's in a word anyway?
Really isn't this all about semantics?
Posted by: Speller | 2008-02-21 5:17:28 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.