Welcome pt. 3: “Wearing” our Environmentalism

Alright, let’s talk about the final step in becoming an Eco Freako and why it’s important. Buckle in because there is a lot to cover. We might even have to break this into two parts on its own.

Before we get started, maybe it’s a good idea to remind everyone what a Freako’s 4 key beliefs are:

1. Manmade climate change is real and needs to be dealt with immediately on a grand scale
2. Worldwide pollution and waste management are at crisis levels
3. We all have a responsibility to deal with the global environmental crisis
4. We all need to wear our environmentalism on our sleeves

Much of the talk so far has been about encouraging all individuals to buy into dealing with our environmental crisis according to their life situations. Getting near unanimous buy-in is important. Turning that buy-in into a movement is even more important, so let’s talk about that.

“Wearing our environmentalism on our sleeves:” What does that mean?

It means we can’t afford to be quiet, simple, yet dedicated environmentalists anymore (not that we’re accusing you). And saying that doesn’t mean we’re looking for more extreme environmental activists either, although we would certainly welcome more. No, we are simply laying out three relatively straightforward expectations. We’re looking for:

• People who aren’t afraid to bring up environmental issues during polite conversations
• People who aren’t afraid to correct environmental ignorance when they hear it.
• Most importantly: People who will hold politicians accountable for their blatant opposition to, or silence toward, proposing and passing meaningful environmental legislation.

Let’s talk about these expectations one by one.

Bringing up environmental issues during polite conversation

We think this is the easiest of the three expectations to commit to but we could be wrong. Maybe some of you find it awkward to work in topics like recycling or conserving or any other environmentally-related topic into your everyday conversations with family, friends, and coworkers. Maybe the problem is that some of your close friends and relatives have a negative reaction when they hear topics related to “environmentalism” or “environmentalists.” We’ll talk about some of those negative perceptions later in this article, but for now, we want you to try hard not to care about anyone’s negative preconceptions. The reason is simple.

These topics should be important to you.

They are too important to keep to yourself. They are at least as important as talking about what you did at work today or what you had for dinner or what your plans are for the weekend. We all need environmental conversations to become as normal and commonplace as any of the other mundane conversations we have daily. We need the world to be talking about environmental issues and that conversation starts with you.

And if you have a friend or relative who thinks anything related to environmentalism is silly, this next section should help.

Correcting environmental ignorance when you hear it

Environmental ignorance, especially climate-change ignorance, is a huge problem in this country. We’ll go into much greater detail about this topic later in this “Welcome to” series, but for now, let’s just talk about what you should do when you hear it. Don’t ignore it. You don’t have to be a jerk. You don’t have to be confrontational, but we think it’s very important that you don’t ignore it.

For example, when you have your family over for Thanksgiving dinner and your crazy your uncle says, “It’s freezing outside. So much for global warming,” don’t let his ignorant comment slide. The proper response should be something like, “You know that’s not how it works, right?”

Putting ignorance on the defensive is always a good strategy. If your uncle has the guts to respond with whacky theories as to why global warming is a hoax go ahead and shoot them down one by one with actual facts (you’ll have to study up on those, of course – keep reading this website). Wear him down with those facts until he changes the subject if you have to. The important thing is to not let ignorant comments slide in a misguided effort to be polite or to keep the peace. Here are three reasons why.

• The topic of environmentalism is extremely import
• Preventing environmental misinformation from spreading is extremely important
• Ignorant people who spread environmental misinformation tend to vote and influence other people who tend to vote

This isn’t baseball

Look, if your wacky uncle said he believes Chipper Jones is the greatest 3^rd baseman of all time, letting him hold onto that delusion is polite (even though everyone knows it’s Mike Schmidt). But we’re not talking about an inconsequential topic like baseball. We have a global environmental crisis on our hands. It’s extremely consequential. Ignoring false comments that affect everyone’s lives is not polite at all. It can actually do great harm.

People like your uncle like to talk; some people will listen

People like your uncle are commonplace. They shouldn’t get to have the first and only word about important topics, yet frequently they are allowed to. It wasn’t polite for your uncle to say something ignorant by implying climate change isn’t real. It certainly wouldn’t be polite to let his ignorance go unchallenged.

The obnoxious uncles of the world never think about whether or not anyone else wants to hear their political views because they are very used to no one ever challenging them. They like to steamroll conversations. We need to stop allowing ourselves to be steamrolled. 

The buck stops with your crazy uncle

Obviously, it doesn’t have to be an uncle. The “crazy uncle” is always used in these types of examples, aren’t they? Our apologies to any rational uncles out there. Obviously, the obnoxious person (or people) in your life could be anybody. What’s important is that you need to understand how the obnoxious person in your life operates. Look at it from his perspective. He is used to getting away with spreading his misinformed views without receiving any pushback. To him the reason is obvious. He is convinced he is smarter than everyone else in the room. He believes his wise words can’t be challenged. Why? Because they are too wise to be challenged. How can anyone argue against something that is so true?

Now, we realize, from the outside looking in, this rationale sounds stupid and arrogant and it is. But everything your crazy uncle observes backs up his stupid, arrogant conclusion. He’s used to seeing people politely nodding their heads while he’s talking because, to him, they either already believe what he’s saying or he thinks he can convince them to believe.

Ignorance spreads and ignorant people like to vote

And the sad truth is he will convince some people. Ignorance spreads like a disease if it goes unchallenged. That’s why it’s important to stop it in its tracks when you hear it in your presence. It may not be something you want to do, not when it’s coming from a friend or family member. Everyone wants harmony in their lives, but the topic is too important. Being polite in this situation isn’t polite at all because climate misinformation does real harm. The most significant harm is obvious.

Misinformed people like your uncle tend to vote.

There’s no getting around that fact. So if you vow to always challenge environmental misinformation whenever you hear it by countering with actual facts and putting the know-it-all person on the defensive, you can stop other people from being misinformed. The less misinformed people we have voting, the more likely it is we will be able to elect politicians who will actually fight for climate-change legislation.

Which brings us to our next expectation.

Holding politicians accountable

This is what our discussion has been leading to. We’ve said it numerous times before and we will keep on saying it. In order for us to solve our environmental crisis, our government has to change. Changes made by individuals are important, but no matter how many of us make them and no matter what they are, they won’t be enough. We need massive-scale changes and we needed them decades ago. Our government is uniquely qualified to make these necessary massive changes. For that reason, environmental politics will be a big focus on this website.

So is EcoFreakos.com a political website?

Yes, but it shouldn’t have to be. Every other industrialized country in the world acknowledges manmade climate change is real and is an existential crisis that needs to be dealt with immediately. It really isn’t a political issue anywhere else, and that reality should hit rationally-minded people like a slap in the face. The United States, a country that is supposed to lead in all things that are deemed important, especially in terms of technology, modern living, and making the world a better place, is purposefully taking a backseat when it comes to the greatest crisis our civilized planet has ever faced. The fact that we citizens put up with this perilous, irrational obstruction is astounding.

Think we’re overstating things?  How about this – we are the only country withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement. The only country… in a whole wide world full of countries. Every third-world, non-industrialized, backward, or turbulent country you can think of has signed on. Syria has signed on. Syria! But the United States will be the lone holdout beginning in one year. Every other damn country out there has decided to choose rationality over insanity, and the reason we are choosing insanity is obvious. It’s politics. Those politics have to be addressed head-on.

So yes, this will be a political website among other things. And we know what some of you are thinking. Wow, this post took a dramatic turn. We sound angry. And to that we say:

We are angry.

And further, we ask, why aren’t you?

It’s time for everyone to get angry

Remember, if you believe manmade climate change is real, which it is, and that we are in the middle of a global environmental crisis, which we are, then it should really anger you when you think about how we got to this point and how we are nowhere close to implementing meaningful solutions to fix this monumental problem.

And we mean real anger. Like if someone was threatening you and your family’s well-being… which they are. That kind of anger. But as we mentioned in part 1 of this “Welcome to Eco Freakos” series, most of the climate-change-believing world is still acting like they know their houses are on fire but are still getting ready for work. Acting normal isn’t normal, so we have to stop doing it. We have to stop waiting for some non-existent person or group to step in to save us. They aren’t coming. We’re the ones that have to force the necessary changes and the most meaningful way to do that is to vow to only vote for people who make fighting climate change central to their campaigns and have detailed, effective, transparent, and realistic plans for doing so. Lip service won’t cut it (although lip service would be an improvement to what we have now).

But is “politics” really the problem?

The plan moving forward should be obvious. Changing our government is key. But as we continue to cite the word “politics” over and over in this discussion, we should probably pause here because so far we’ve been a little bit misleading in our terminology. We are unnecessarily being non-specific. The truth is the U.S.’s failure to take on the global environmental crisis isn’t a failure of U.S. politics. It is specifically a failure of Republican politics.

There, we said it.

Now, before some of you environment-loving conservatives bail on this post because it has suddenly become partisan, please hold on. If you don’t want to hear us address the role the Republican Party has played in overtly opposing any policy related to climate change, go ahead and skip to the section “Can you be a conservative and an Eco Freako at the same time?” that appears a little later in this article. But if you are able to hear what we have to say about Republicans, read on.

The true problem with American climate politics: Republicans

Obviously, when our goal as a website is to get everyone onboard to address the global environmental crisis, the safest thing to do would be to remain as diplomatic as possible, keep our terminology generalized, and stick to generic political references to avoid alienating anyone, but that simply wouldn’t be honest. In order for us to use generic terms, we would have to pretend we don’t know the root cause of the problem within our government. But we do know the root cause. Climate change and environmentalism shouldn’t be a partisan issue and yet it is and one political party is responsible for that.

Do you have your doubts?

How about this? Only one political party still largely denies climate change even exists. Only one political party ignores climate change research. Only one political party comes up with lame excuses for why we can’t propose and enact meaningful climate-change legislation; excuses like, “we can’t afford it” or “we need to do more research” or “there are more important things on our agenda.”

Only one political party has had state officials in multiple states who have banned using the term “climate change” in state government. Only one political party has embraced “the dumb” by willfully misunderstanding the difference between weather science and climate science by moronically claiming global warming can’t be real if it freezes during winter. Only one political party would put an imbecilic climate-denier in charge of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee.

Saying “both sides” is dishonest

This isn’t a “both sides are equally bad” issue. Only one side has obstructed and continues to obstruct meaningful legislation. That side needs to be called out because nothing will change if we don’t. That side is the Republican Party. Their obstruction can’t be written off as “just politics.” Their obstruction harms us all directly and puts our planet in peril.

In short, their obstruction should make us all very angry. And, if anything, we’ve understated the problem. Republican obstructionism has been craven, intellectually bankrupt and seeks to misinform as many people as it can along the way. Unfortunately, there are no signs the current breed of Republicans has any intention of changing their stance toward dealing with climate change. Until they do, and more likely, until they are forced to do so, we can’t afford to give any of them our vote.

These are harsh but necessary points to make but, in the interest of saving time, we’ve only given a broad summary of the problem. In the future, we promise to produce more specific and detailed articles about how exactly Republicans conduct their environmental-obstruction campaigns. Now that we’ve pointed out the root political problem, we should probably shift back to the topic of not alienating would-be allies in the environmental cause. Obviously, we don’t want to alienate anyone so let’s address that immediate concern.

Can you be a conservative and an Eco Freako at the same time?

The quick answer is yes, but we don’t expect anyone to take our word for it. We have to make our case. Some of you might think that will be hard to do since we just painted Republicans in an extremely awful light in the last few paragraphs, but we think it’s possible. Let’s start with something that we’ve already stated.

Being an environmentalist shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

We should all agree with that, right? If you consider yourself a conservative and an environmentalist, good for you. The two terms shouldn’t be a contradiction. One of the greatest and most famous environmentalists of all time, Teddy Roosevelt, was a Republican. Richard Nixon famously created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as President. There was a time when both parties embraced environmentalism and environmental policies, but that is no longer the case. In fact, many conservatives now associate the term “environmentalist” with irrational extremism. Some even go a step further by using derogatory terms like “tree hugger” or “whack job” to describe people who fight for environmental causes.

Nobody claimed all environmentalists are perfect

To be fair, maybe some of those reactionary labels were warranted. It’s certainly possible, if not probable, that there have been occasions when some environmentalists may have been too extreme. Every significant group has their bad moments. We’ve heard stories about important development projects that were derailed due to a “save the [insert endangered creature]” movement. Many of those movements were justified, but some likely were misguided. But rather than debate which specific activism efforts may have fallen into which category, let’s go ahead and grant that some environmental activists have acted irrationally at times in the past.  Now that we have granted that notion, if you are a person who has a problem with modern-day environmentalism, go ahead and make a list of any of those irrational moments you can think of. When you are done, look at that list and ask yourself these two questions:

• Is my opposition to these specific incidents worth reflexively discarding all environmental causes?
• Is it worth ignoring all environmental science?

Which side are you on?

If your answer is yes to both questions then, for now, carry on with your lives. You aren’t Eco Freako material. But be warned: we think you are embracing ignorance and we plan to force you to confront your ignorance every chance we get.

But if your answer is no to both questions then we think your next step should be obvious. We think you should confront any negative biases you have formed based on isolated incidents and shift your focus to the bigger picture. We think you need to get back to calling yourself an environmentalist and challenge your conservative friends to do the same whenever the topic comes up. Doing so is taking a big step in the right direction, but it only gets you part way to the ultimate destination – voting according to your environmental values.

The obvious conservative objection: Conservatives value many more issues besides environmentalism. Why should I vote according to a single issue?

We get it. As a voter, not just as a conservative voter, but as a voter, you have many concerns other than environmentalism. You have economic concerns. Health concerns. Job concerns. Cultural concerns. Religious-freedom concerns. They all play a part into who you will vote for, and more often than not, you tend to find a conservative candidate whose values most align with yours. We get it. We Eco Freakos aren’t asking you to change your values. But for now, we are suggesting you should become a single-issue voter. Here’s why.

Our global environmental crisis is the greatest crisis our civilized planet has ever faced.

Most other times we think voting according to a singular issue is unwise, but this isn’t one of those times. Not while this problem continues to bear down on us like a planet-sized monkey on our backs. Every other issue you can think of filters through this enormous one.

Is healthcare important to you? Great, we think so too but not more important than the health of the world you plan to pass off to your children. Is religious freedom important? Well, hey, it can’t be all that important if you can’t worship when and where you want to because certain parts of the country become uninhabitable. Are fossil fuel jobs important to you? Fine, but for how long will they be important in a finite industry that has an expiration date and is transitioning to renewable alternatives?

It’s not really a binary choice

Admittedly, we are oversimplifying some of the arguments here, but we are also being generous. We’re posing these issues as if they are binary choices when, in reality, they aren’t. You really don’t have to choose between your healthcare and climate-change legislation. There are already healthcare laws in place and neither party has threatened to take away employer-based health care plans which is what most people have anyway. You won’t have to choose between religious freedom and fighting climate change because there are longstanding religious protections already in place and aren’t going anywhere if you refuse to vote for a conservative climate denier no matter what Fox News might tell you.

And you don’t have to choose between your job and climate-change legislation. We think it’s crazy to think that any specific job is sacred in and of itself. We don’t think it was noble for the horse-drawn buggy makers in the early part of the 20^th century to cling to their buggy-making jobs while thumbing their noses at the newly created auto industry. Those buggy makers eventually found new jobs and they were better off. New technologies bring new jobs. Anyone who tells you there won’t be practical jobs in the new green economy for workers in dying industries is lying to you.

Urgent situations should be treated with urgency

What we’re really trying to say here is we can’t let other issues distract us from the most important issue of our time. Voting for the people who will address our global environmental crisis can’t be some far off goal. We think it’s undeniable that we need significant climate-change legislation passed and policies in place within the next 10 years. The only way to make that happen is to make climate-change policy the highest priority on the ballot and to only vote for candidates who make it their highest priority too. Right now there is only one party that has candidates who will do that. We should vote for those candidates, and only those candidates, until the other side is forced to accept reality and re-embrace the environmental roots that were once a core part of their party.

Maybe that’s too much to ask

Okay, maybe we’ve made a decent case or maybe it was awful but, either way, maybe you still can’t bring yourself to vote for anyone else but a Republican. Maybe you just hate Democrats. We think that’s irrelevant since we should all be focused on the singular, planet-threatening issue that is out there, but we won’t say it’s a deal breaker. There’s still one other thing you might be able to do, with a strong emphasis on “might.”

It’s true that we think voting for environmentally friendly candidates is the most important step anyone can take to address climate change. We won’t back down from that claim, but maybe you just can’t bring yourself to vote for a Democrat. Fine. That leaves you with one other option.

You need to do everything you can to change your Republican Party and change it quickly.

Put up or shut up

Maybe you think that’s possible, but you’d have to do more than just talk a good game. You’d have to prove it. You can’t just try to do it. You’d actually have to succeed. We think that will be a nearly impossible task. Here’s why.

Your party is full of climate deniers, ignorers, and gaslighters. They have zero climate-change legislation advocates. But, hey, if you think you can get them from zero to everyone within the next election cycle or two then have at it. You have a lot of organizing, educating, and demonstrating to do in a very short time. Maybe you can surprise us. This entire article is about what it means to wear our environmentalism on our sleeves. If you are a conservative and think you can help force the Republican Party to, first, collectively acknowledge manmade climate change is real and, then, to immediately embrace real, effective, detailed legislation to fight it, then congratulations! You have what it takes to be an Eco Freako!

Not too fast

But before we celebrate, let’s come down to earth a little bit. Between these two options:

1. Vow to only vote for the party that has the only candidates who will propose and enact meaningful climate change legislation (which in turn will force the other party to abandon their climate-change obstructionism), or
2. Get the Republican Party – the climate-change obstructionist party – to dramatically change within the next few years.

We think the 1^st option will be much easier to do and will have the added benefit of forcing option 2 to become a reality. But either way, welcome to the Eco-Freako team.

We have just one last warning.

We won’t be nice

While you take on Republicans your way, we’ll take them on our way. We plan to take on Republican BS every chance we get. We promise to be fair and honest but we have no intention to be kind. We might even use salty language along the way.

And we have good reason. Some of the crap Republicans say and do with regard to our environment makes us very angry. Our words will reflect that anger and will be directed toward the environment-obstructing idiots who deserve it. If your favorite conservative politician happens to be one of those idiots, you should prepare your eyes to soak in the well-deserved vitriol we’ll be writing to describe his abhorrent behavior. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.   

But rest assured, we also vow to keep our political criticisms completely focused on climate change and policies specifically related to the environment. Keep in mind, however, those discussions may not be as narrowly focused as you think. It’s likely we will venture into topics like the economy and taxes as they might relate to environmental legislation. But we promise not to stray too far beyond that.

Is that it?

So are we finished? Does that cover, “what it means to wear your environmentalism on your sleeve?” Yes and no. We certainly covered the topic but it is only an outline of what is needed to start a movement. We need to tie everything together so that our mission is clear, and we’ll begin to do that in part 4 where our focus will be on expanding our discussion about ignorance; a topic we touched on briefly but is so important it needs its own blog post.

In the meantime, if you’ve gotten this far then, yes, we made it through the four core beliefs of being an Eco Freako and it looks like you have survived. Welcome to the team!

Celebrate as you see fit and then check back with us for part 4.