Comments on: Former Scientific Advisor says Green Campaigners are Luddites

By: Robyn Williams

Robyn Williams — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:10:08 +0000

Simply “stop admiring men in ferraris” isnt that in odds with saying “[Their argument is] ‘Let’s get away from all the technological gizmos and developments of the 20th century’, and I think that is utter hopelessness.” Surely a ferrari is a 20th century gizmo. lol. Nice size 12 Dave.

By: Pem Charnley

Pem Charnley — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:59:39 +0000

What is essential is that green movements – whatever part of the globe – shed existent piety if it does exist.

Certainly within the UK, there *can* be a little bit of the holier-than-thou attitude amongst some.

A frightful attitude for anyone to adopt, whatever their lifestlye. An immediate turn off.

But as far as the Luddite claims … not sure I’ve ever met someone with these tendencies within the UK’s green arena.

But thank you both for taking the time to comment. Both comments interesting.

By: ed harris

ed harris — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:46:58 +0000

In general, I agree with King that the image presented to (or at least widely held by) the British public of environmentalists has some luddite characteristics – anti-growth, and demanding some drop in living standards. This is clearly something the environmental movement needs to work on if it ever wants to be part of widespread social change rather than a niche interest.
However, I disagree with King’s position on techno-fixes, in which he is curiously out of step with public opinion and a significant chunk of scientfic thought.
We need an environmental movement which helps people to make positive change in their own life, encourages wider social change in our communities, *and* successfully brings about structural change at the national and international levels. This is no easy task, but I think King is right in suggesting that our current environmental movement is not succeeding. But does that mean we should disband and ignore the environmentalists. I hope not.
More on this

By: Tim Hurst

Tim Hurst — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:49:39 +0000

Pem, thanks for raising this issue, it’s a very important one. I think you are spot on with your analysis of the AP article, it did not catch the nuance of King’s position at all.

I completely agree with his argument that the doomsday-scenario environmentalist does not have much traction in terms of gathering political support for the green cause. Similarly, the strategy of moralizing (laying on a guilt-trip)does not work either – it can be both alienating and polarizing.

I can’t really comment on whether his claims about the British Green movement are true, but I would argue that the type of environmentalism he is critical of, is less prevalent than it once was.

Much like Shellenberger and Nordhaus’ recent indictment of ‘traditional’ moralist environmentalism, King’s book seems to be a day late and a dollar short.