Environmentalists New Cause

I guess it was bound to happen. Environmentalism has been hit with the "too white" label.

The Daily Caller - Sierra Club: Big Problem With Environmentalism Is ‘Unsustainable Whiteness’

Arguments over race do not appeal to me and I rarely take part in them. But this story has me ROFLMAO. Here is the gist:

Grist blogger Nikhil Swaminathan claimed the environmental movement has “mostly run by well-off white people concerned about conserving critters and our country’s natural beauty, not the health and welfare,” in a post Tuesday. The Sierra Club’s official Twitter account later shared the blog with followers Wednesday afternoon.

The environmental movement is morphing into not just saving the planet but now includes saving the oppressed. I'm guessing that climate change on it's own is too narrow in focus and it's time to expand the religion.

Social justice activists have criticized both Greenpeace and the Sierra Club for supporting the “white-hetero-patriarchal-imperial ideology which premises this continued climate colonialism.”

Seems that the once most sensitive group out there (the greenies) aren't sensitive enough. Look out Al Gore, Al Sharpton may be coming after your title.

To whom is she referring when she says "off white people" I wonder?

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

I wish all these people would just go away. Let's burn Tumblr with fire.

Put the race card back in the deck and go home. Environmentalism doesn't' have a skin colour you tools.

~Tenth

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

white-hetero-patriarchal-imperial ideology which premises this continued climate colonialism

wow are you sure that isn't someone trolling? lol

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
To whom is she referring when she says "off white people" I wonder?

"well-off" white people - that would be Al Gore for one. I'm not in the inner circle of the Sierra Club but I'm willing to bet there's a lot of well-off white folks backing the cause. I don't know if the environment is particularly interesting to well-off non-white folks.

The problem they have with trying to save the environment in developing and third world countries is that it's hard to get someone to value that empty, open hunk of land and those animals when your family is starving.

We in the developed world have time to naval gaze and worry about such things precisely because we are well-fed and clothed and often prosperous. We don't have to worry from day to day where our next meal will come from. That's not life in most of the world where conservation is the toughest and animals most endangered.

Of course, taking the tactic that white Western Imperialism is the problem is the wrong one. Those countries aren't poor because we're not. They're poor for a variety of other reasons that are complex and intertangled.

But at least it's good that environmental clubs are starting to realize that they'd have an easier time saving the spotted whooping chinchilla of Lesser Sucksitstan if they could make it suck less for the people who live there.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

You rise a very heavy "point of decision" it's true whites have shown to buy land and "preserve it" far away from home with high fences and walls. What's more important this plant or critter, or human life?

It's not hypothetical.

originally posted by: ketsuko
We don't have to worry from day to day where our next meal will come from. That's not life in most of the world where conservation is the toughest and animals most endangered.

I completely agree and that's what's wrong with most social movements in the western world. Even the poorest in the U.S. have a better chance at a better life than people of some third-world nations.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Yep, and imagine how arrogant that must make us seem when we do come in from our developed nations and try to tell the dirt poor slash and burn farmer that he can't do that without having even a realistic alternative for him to make ends meet for his family.

In some ways, it's as arrogant as when the coastal city elites tell everyone in the country that we should naturally all be driving tiny little electric boxes on wheels that barely go anywhere before needing to charge for 8 hours while ignoring the day to day reality of many who life in the flyover areas of the country.

I guess the environmentalists and SJWs aren't awake yet. I was hoping for more of a debate.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Climate change global warming, what have you, like chemtrails and "owls and critters", are deflection away from the real problems of pollution. Its a failed movement because the stated goals aren't the Real problem, anyway.

What the hell does saving owls have to do with corporate toxic runoff into the air, land and water?

What does 'mystery spraying' have to do with jet exhaust?

What does 'the 'climate' have to do with environmental pollution from Industry?

You're right... nothing.

In that light, dude is right...

...the environmental movement (is) “mostly run by well-off white people concerned about conserving critters and our country’s natural beauty, not the health and welfare,”...

a reply to: intrptr



This makes people day d'ah. It's real, tangible, and cuddly. People will give you money to save that. Then, you take the money and use it to push your political agenda under the guise of saving that.

Haven't you seen the sad, sad Sara McLaughlin commercials with all the abused dogs and cats? They are using the same idea. They aren't actually as concerned about saving the sad dogs and cats as they are about lobbying to control the entire industry and every industry that even indirectly has something to do with animals in some way. For better or worse, for those who do well by their stock and those who are doing poorly.

Pollution ... is not photogenic and no one wants to believe it's a problem. So, we circle back around to polar bears drowning and panda bears, and besides the thing is that it's not about caring about health of the environment, it's about control, pure and simple.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

This is why I think it should be legal to slap stupid people.

a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed wth everything you said. Corrupt, institutionalized Corporate Charity is broader than just save the whales or 'abused pets'.

Still, on a personal level, I can help a disadvantaged person or critter directly, whenever the opportunity presents itself.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed wth everything you said. Corrupt, institutionalized Corporate Charity is broader than just save the whales or 'abused pets'.

Still, on a personal level, I can help a disadvantaged person or critter directly, whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Oh, believe me. I understand. I prefer the direct touch too. So far, all my pets have been rescues just for a start although we may break that trend because we loved our ragdoll so much and we figure that our kiddo needs to experience having kittens around at least once while growing up. So we may go through a breeder to get one ragdoll kitten, but his play buddy will still be a good ol' grade A alley cat from the pound.

And after these two kittens, if we want to continue having ragdolls, we'll likely work through rescues again.

I prefer the personal touch through charity too. It makes me feel good to know that I can give freely rather than having to be forced by government mandate.

a reply to: ketsuko


Too bad charities play on people sentiment to want to help and yet its easier to just give a few bucks and not actually help lend a hand. I think the environmentalist movement is hijacked this way too.

They know this and wax rich off it.

I know, having spent a lot of time under bridges and not one charity ever came up under there and offered anyone anything.

The bridges were off rail lianes filled with train cars filled with coal, oil, molten sulfur, yuck. Nbpody complaining about that either.

Its always some vague 'movement' that draws the media eye...

When an organization gets this top heavy with more exec's and less cash going into it's missions you see them chewing themselves apart from the inside. People of color are lacking in many higher positions across the board, not just the Sierra Club or Greenpeace. Screaming about it doesn't fix it. Qualified job applicants DO.

The green movement has always been accused of being overly caucasian in make-up it's not really news, or a new issue. It was noticed from the onset. Back then it was "white people donating bucks to soothe their guilt" in the 70's.

Some of these SJW's need to realize that working for a non-profit shouldn't have to entail living on ramen noodles and working 80 hrs a week, that dedication to a cause doesn't preclude a living wage. Some of the larger Orgs have taken this too far, but the smaller outfits go the exact opposite route. It's like there's no middle ground anymore.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Yep, and imagine how arrogant that must make us seem when we do come in from our developed nations and try to tell the dirt poor slash and burn farmer that he can't do that without having even a realistic alternative for him to make ends meet for his family.

In some ways, it's as arrogant as when the coastal city elites tell everyone in the country that we should naturally all be driving tiny little electric boxes on wheels that barely go anywhere before needing to charge for 8 hours while ignoring the day to day reality of many who life in the flyover areas of the country.

Or give control in what, when and how much we manufacture to a an unelected committee outside our nation and give up sovereignty over our own nation.....Paris accord, anyone?

I think in the end it all comes back to people who think they have the magic formula for life, the universe, and everything and they can't trust that others won't similarly hit upon either their perfect formula or other perfect formulas of their own.

It's that little internal voice that says, "Gee, if everyone just did everything exactly like this ... then it would all be perfect!" And then the little dictator comes out and they start to do their best to dictate.

I still say that the environmental movement and SJW don't have anything in common. Let the former be the champion for the critters and the latter for the people. It's really all about money in the end.