![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article had been moved to Environmental movement in the United States. See Talk:Environmental movement in the United States for the past history. I have moved and cut'n'pasted relevent info back to this page ( Environmentalism). I feel there is justifiction for an Environmentalism page and an Environmental movement page. Along with Environmentalist it divides the subject up neatly and avoids a cluttered Environmental movement article. It seem to me that moving a page on the international environmental movement with some stuff about the US to Environmental movement in the United States was a little geographically blinkered. Alan Liefting 07:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Should this article be filed under Religion. From a neutral POV, the following quote indicates to me that environmentalism is just another religion.
"Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths. There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe. Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday---these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don't want to talk anybody out of them, as I don't want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don't want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can't talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith. And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them."
hello sorry, my english isnt good, but I can object something : from an encyclopedian point of view there are different streams of environmentalism, including some very materialistic, economical-driven streams (some speak of green capitalism). others point out the spiritual aspects perhaps but from an ethical point of view. And others pragmatic, including a lot of NGO, reformists want to apply precaution principle, international conventions protecting flora and fauna because they only "see" the pollution, the decline of biodiversity, the deforestation, the climate change ... and there are lots of reports, counterreports made by scientifics, they try to analyse the reality of the impact, not just "believe". the United nations (with de world bank) is also alarmed : they create a lot of initiatives, voluntary, non volontary : UNEP, protocole, conventions, global impact ... another metaphor ; if i'm living like diane fossey, seing how they kills gorillas, i didn't need to be in a religious mood : poacher kills and destroys the country; collectively it would be ok to obtain collective consensus to solve the problems. -- Ayanoa 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
i think that at least a connection with religion should be mentioned - or a "criticism" section added with an excerpt and reference to http://www.maxeiner-miersch.de/new_piety_e.htm ? gregor
This article should be merged with environmentalism. -- Centrx 19:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC) Comment moved from talk:environmentalist by habj
I don't know about administration of article "history", but just in case i copy the definition, perhaps something come up for the final result. -- Ayanoa 21:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Ecology basically deals with the interaction of plants and animals. Environmentalists more look at physical stuff and how they effect ecosystems.
example desertification an environmental scientist will be mostly interested in the climate wheras an ecologist in the plant life and animal life
an environmentalist may try and reclaim the desert by planting trees wheras the ecologist will try and work out how to best support the existing ecosystems.
of course there is much overlap but i hope u get it now-- Rainbow Warrior 13:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Michael Crichtons speech to the Commonwealth Club, where he compares religion to environmentalism, seems to crop up quite often on this page. I have removed from the article the word "Some" linked to his speech. One opinion is not the same as some. Alan Liefting 07:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
A question: should there be some discussion of Environmentalism as a political ideology?
I have found this listed in Wikibooks on . [1]Political Theory. If so, there is a case for not merging this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adamasao ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
What about creating a page about local environmental problems and easy, practical solution for each countries using local language? This will turn wikipedia into education tool for the younger generations. The environmental problems in one country is different from other country. The solution is not demonstration on the street, "extreme actions" (like greenpeace, ecoterrorism), but simple everyday action: energy and water conservation, recycling, using alternative energy etc.
It has been a very poor article for quite some time and as with what happened with the environmental movement page a systemic bias towards the US has crept in. Alan Liefting 21:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I strongly agree. This is a problem. The history section is particularly poor. I am starting an Environmentalism in the UK page -it would be good to see other national/regional pages Halon8 20:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Would it be appropriate to mention in this article those movements that are starting to emerge that can be understood as analogous to environmentalism? As an example, the term Cultural environmentalism might be appropriate.
-- Cgranade 02:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
On 10/12/06, PBS aired Is God Green?, a look at a growing subset of American Evangelical Christians who are embracing, in their own way, the environmental movement/lifestyle etc. After searching around Wikipedia, I found nothing. Does anyone know of any article on Wikipedia which address this? If not, I'd like to create an article and would like suggestions on article names, proper categorization, what to include etc. Any ideas?-- Feel free to respond at my talk page Hraefen Talk 17:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Could someone add a link to environmental determinism at the top of this page? I would but I have not figured out how to do such.
In the field of geography Environmentalism is the common word for Environmental Determinism, and I was very confused in looking for the article on Environmentalism in the Geographic contex. Thank you.
I think this is a great page on Environmentalism in the US, and before we start hacking at it to make it more WWV-compatable, perhaps we should copy its contents into a US specific page, and then start cutting and altering to make it more WWV. The Gomm 23:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Before I write a bit on biodiversity and breeding programs, can anyone remind me of the proper name for that white Arabian deer or related creature that went extinct in the wild before breeding of captive ones before being released back? Thank you. Wiki-newbie 19:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone thought of incorporating this to the article? Bearly541 talk 01:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Environmental issues affect environmentalism. Sorry i already added before reading this. I suggest u read carefully before editing. Ofcourse it does need editing. But what i have written is a good starting point.
Shouldn’t there be something about Greenpeace in this article? Under the heading Environmental Organizations maybe, and also a link to the Greenpeace page at the bottom. They defiantly have been one of the most influential environmental groups and my be the biggest. S.dedalus 05:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I see the Environmentalism in the U.S.A. section has been split off. I'm not so sure about this as this article now lacks any sort of info on the development of history of the topic. I think that while these are US authors, their impact has been quite global. Walden and Silent Spring have been important works across the world. -- Salix alba ( talk) 13:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I think the present article blurs the distinction between the environmentalist movement - particularly partisan advocacy regarding global warming, the ozone layer, DDT use, etc. - and Conservationism. I even wonder if this is deliberate.
Of course, there is some overlap. But not all anti-enviromentalists are "anti-nature", "anti-conservation" or "pro-pollution". -- Uncle Ed 19:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
REPLY-- Very true i am an environmentalist and are even anti a lot of environmentalists. Reason being is they give us a bad name by pushing doomsday notions to there economic gain or such like. Some make wild predicitions that just haven't come to pass.
Why not do a section on youth environmentalism and that movement.
.... and kindly contribute to these new articles when you get time, and request others too.
See Wildlife of India for reference.
Thanks
Atulsnischal 18:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested in Environment, Wildlife, Conservation and Nature etc. please join in to contribute, even starting off with making new stub class articles will be a great contribution.
Sincerely
Atulsnischal 16:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
This is an article on a political movement. I find it odd that it does not have the standard "Criticisms" section. Shall we create one? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyphen5 ( talk • contribs) 07:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC).
I too agree there should be a Criticism Section, why the hell has no one created one yet? Don't let the environmental radicals win by letting them keep this page so "all perfect world"...please someone write an relevant Criticism section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.18.162.33 ( talk) 17:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed a bit of text that pushed back the environmentalism movement's history by equating pantheistic and animistic beliefs with environmenatl beliefs. If we wish to do so, then the evironmental movement's history could be pushed back well beyond pre-history to about 30 000 years bp. I think keeping the concepts separate helps the article remain encycopedic. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 23:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Consider this definition of environmentalism from a different point of view: [quoting] "environmentalism is an activist political movement, with moral and religious overtones, aimed at alleviating perceived and fancied human woes falsely attributed to misuse of the natural environment; a movement which uses the power of state laws to regulate individual economic choice to the diminishment of human values and life." the article quotes the wikipedia definition and strongly calls the neutrality of the environmentalism article into question. thus the neutrality tag. Full article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff151.html
I propose this article be moved or renamed American Environmentalism - That is what the present article seems to be about. KAM 00:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
This article makes no mention of the many criticisms of environmentalism. This article seems to reflect mainly the attitudes/bias of the Western upper-middle class.
Some common criticisms not mentioned:
1. Environmentalism hurts poor people by slowing the rate of economic growth.
2. Environmentalism is best understood as a New Religious Movement, and not a necessary response to environmental science.
3. Environmentalism represents Western elites at the expense of those less advantaged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.3.70 ( talk) June 26, 2007 15:06
Anyone watching this page might be interested in this new article. The wiki editor appears to also be the author of the only source given. I'm not sure what to do with it since it's so narrowly defined and needs a lot of help to get up to Wikipedia standards. Could someone jump in on this one? It might need to be merged elsewhere. Thanks -- Rkitko ( talk) 16:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Environmentalists that promote nuclear power, in a similar way to yellow union in the workplace scope.-- Nukeless ( talk) 11:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
This should be mentioned. 65.163.112.205 02:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
The earliest known writings concerned with environmental pollution were Arabic medical treatises written between the 9th and 13th centuries, by physicians such as al-Kindi (Alkindus), Qusta ibn Luqa (Costa ben Luca), Muhammad ibn Zakarīya Rāzi (Rhazes), Ibn Al-Jazzar, al-Tamimi, al-Masihi, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ali ibn Ridwan, Ibn Jumay, Isaac Israeli ben Solomon, Abd-el-latif, Ibn al-Quff, and Ibn al-Nafis. Their works covered a number of subjects related to pollution such as air contamination, water contamination, soil contamination, solid waste mishandling, and environmental assessments of certain localities. [1]
This section no doubt is historically true but it is not directly associated with the history of 'environmentalism'. Ancient peoples wrote and practiced all sorts of things that could be called environmentalism but is not historically linked directly with the origins of environmentalism in the 19th C. This habit of reaching way back into the past to find 'proto-' examples of modern movements, organizations and ideas is to stretch the idea origins out of shape. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 14:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
A page on environmentalism does not have a link to recycling??? 65.125.133.211 ( talk) 18:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article had been moved to Environmental movement in the United States. See Talk:Environmental movement in the United States for the past history. I have moved and cut'n'pasted relevent info back to this page ( Environmentalism). I feel there is justifiction for an Environmentalism page and an Environmental movement page. Along with Environmentalist it divides the subject up neatly and avoids a cluttered Environmental movement article. It seem to me that moving a page on the international environmental movement with some stuff about the US to Environmental movement in the United States was a little geographically blinkered. Alan Liefting 07:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Should this article be filed under Religion. From a neutral POV, the following quote indicates to me that environmentalism is just another religion.
"Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths. There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe. Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday---these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don't want to talk anybody out of them, as I don't want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don't want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can't talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith. And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them."
hello sorry, my english isnt good, but I can object something : from an encyclopedian point of view there are different streams of environmentalism, including some very materialistic, economical-driven streams (some speak of green capitalism). others point out the spiritual aspects perhaps but from an ethical point of view. And others pragmatic, including a lot of NGO, reformists want to apply precaution principle, international conventions protecting flora and fauna because they only "see" the pollution, the decline of biodiversity, the deforestation, the climate change ... and there are lots of reports, counterreports made by scientifics, they try to analyse the reality of the impact, not just "believe". the United nations (with de world bank) is also alarmed : they create a lot of initiatives, voluntary, non volontary : UNEP, protocole, conventions, global impact ... another metaphor ; if i'm living like diane fossey, seing how they kills gorillas, i didn't need to be in a religious mood : poacher kills and destroys the country; collectively it would be ok to obtain collective consensus to solve the problems. -- Ayanoa 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
i think that at least a connection with religion should be mentioned - or a "criticism" section added with an excerpt and reference to http://www.maxeiner-miersch.de/new_piety_e.htm ? gregor
This article should be merged with environmentalism. -- Centrx 19:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC) Comment moved from talk:environmentalist by habj
I don't know about administration of article "history", but just in case i copy the definition, perhaps something come up for the final result. -- Ayanoa 21:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Ecology basically deals with the interaction of plants and animals. Environmentalists more look at physical stuff and how they effect ecosystems.
example desertification an environmental scientist will be mostly interested in the climate wheras an ecologist in the plant life and animal life
an environmentalist may try and reclaim the desert by planting trees wheras the ecologist will try and work out how to best support the existing ecosystems.
of course there is much overlap but i hope u get it now-- Rainbow Warrior 13:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Michael Crichtons speech to the Commonwealth Club, where he compares religion to environmentalism, seems to crop up quite often on this page. I have removed from the article the word "Some" linked to his speech. One opinion is not the same as some. Alan Liefting 07:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
A question: should there be some discussion of Environmentalism as a political ideology?
I have found this listed in Wikibooks on . [1]Political Theory. If so, there is a case for not merging this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adamasao ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
What about creating a page about local environmental problems and easy, practical solution for each countries using local language? This will turn wikipedia into education tool for the younger generations. The environmental problems in one country is different from other country. The solution is not demonstration on the street, "extreme actions" (like greenpeace, ecoterrorism), but simple everyday action: energy and water conservation, recycling, using alternative energy etc.
It has been a very poor article for quite some time and as with what happened with the environmental movement page a systemic bias towards the US has crept in. Alan Liefting 21:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I strongly agree. This is a problem. The history section is particularly poor. I am starting an Environmentalism in the UK page -it would be good to see other national/regional pages Halon8 20:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Would it be appropriate to mention in this article those movements that are starting to emerge that can be understood as analogous to environmentalism? As an example, the term Cultural environmentalism might be appropriate.
-- Cgranade 02:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
On 10/12/06, PBS aired Is God Green?, a look at a growing subset of American Evangelical Christians who are embracing, in their own way, the environmental movement/lifestyle etc. After searching around Wikipedia, I found nothing. Does anyone know of any article on Wikipedia which address this? If not, I'd like to create an article and would like suggestions on article names, proper categorization, what to include etc. Any ideas?-- Feel free to respond at my talk page Hraefen Talk 17:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Could someone add a link to environmental determinism at the top of this page? I would but I have not figured out how to do such.
In the field of geography Environmentalism is the common word for Environmental Determinism, and I was very confused in looking for the article on Environmentalism in the Geographic contex. Thank you.
I think this is a great page on Environmentalism in the US, and before we start hacking at it to make it more WWV-compatable, perhaps we should copy its contents into a US specific page, and then start cutting and altering to make it more WWV. The Gomm 23:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Before I write a bit on biodiversity and breeding programs, can anyone remind me of the proper name for that white Arabian deer or related creature that went extinct in the wild before breeding of captive ones before being released back? Thank you. Wiki-newbie 19:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone thought of incorporating this to the article? Bearly541 talk 01:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Environmental issues affect environmentalism. Sorry i already added before reading this. I suggest u read carefully before editing. Ofcourse it does need editing. But what i have written is a good starting point.
Shouldn’t there be something about Greenpeace in this article? Under the heading Environmental Organizations maybe, and also a link to the Greenpeace page at the bottom. They defiantly have been one of the most influential environmental groups and my be the biggest. S.dedalus 05:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I see the Environmentalism in the U.S.A. section has been split off. I'm not so sure about this as this article now lacks any sort of info on the development of history of the topic. I think that while these are US authors, their impact has been quite global. Walden and Silent Spring have been important works across the world. -- Salix alba ( talk) 13:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I think the present article blurs the distinction between the environmentalist movement - particularly partisan advocacy regarding global warming, the ozone layer, DDT use, etc. - and Conservationism. I even wonder if this is deliberate.
Of course, there is some overlap. But not all anti-enviromentalists are "anti-nature", "anti-conservation" or "pro-pollution". -- Uncle Ed 19:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
REPLY-- Very true i am an environmentalist and are even anti a lot of environmentalists. Reason being is they give us a bad name by pushing doomsday notions to there economic gain or such like. Some make wild predicitions that just haven't come to pass.
Why not do a section on youth environmentalism and that movement.
.... and kindly contribute to these new articles when you get time, and request others too.
See Wildlife of India for reference.
Thanks
Atulsnischal 18:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested in Environment, Wildlife, Conservation and Nature etc. please join in to contribute, even starting off with making new stub class articles will be a great contribution.
Sincerely
Atulsnischal 16:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
This is an article on a political movement. I find it odd that it does not have the standard "Criticisms" section. Shall we create one? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyphen5 ( talk • contribs) 07:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC).
I too agree there should be a Criticism Section, why the hell has no one created one yet? Don't let the environmental radicals win by letting them keep this page so "all perfect world"...please someone write an relevant Criticism section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.18.162.33 ( talk) 17:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed a bit of text that pushed back the environmentalism movement's history by equating pantheistic and animistic beliefs with environmenatl beliefs. If we wish to do so, then the evironmental movement's history could be pushed back well beyond pre-history to about 30 000 years bp. I think keeping the concepts separate helps the article remain encycopedic. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 23:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Consider this definition of environmentalism from a different point of view: [quoting] "environmentalism is an activist political movement, with moral and religious overtones, aimed at alleviating perceived and fancied human woes falsely attributed to misuse of the natural environment; a movement which uses the power of state laws to regulate individual economic choice to the diminishment of human values and life." the article quotes the wikipedia definition and strongly calls the neutrality of the environmentalism article into question. thus the neutrality tag. Full article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff151.html
I propose this article be moved or renamed American Environmentalism - That is what the present article seems to be about. KAM 00:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
This article makes no mention of the many criticisms of environmentalism. This article seems to reflect mainly the attitudes/bias of the Western upper-middle class.
Some common criticisms not mentioned:
1. Environmentalism hurts poor people by slowing the rate of economic growth.
2. Environmentalism is best understood as a New Religious Movement, and not a necessary response to environmental science.
3. Environmentalism represents Western elites at the expense of those less advantaged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.3.70 ( talk) June 26, 2007 15:06
Anyone watching this page might be interested in this new article. The wiki editor appears to also be the author of the only source given. I'm not sure what to do with it since it's so narrowly defined and needs a lot of help to get up to Wikipedia standards. Could someone jump in on this one? It might need to be merged elsewhere. Thanks -- Rkitko ( talk) 16:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Environmentalists that promote nuclear power, in a similar way to yellow union in the workplace scope.-- Nukeless ( talk) 11:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
This should be mentioned. 65.163.112.205 02:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
The earliest known writings concerned with environmental pollution were Arabic medical treatises written between the 9th and 13th centuries, by physicians such as al-Kindi (Alkindus), Qusta ibn Luqa (Costa ben Luca), Muhammad ibn Zakarīya Rāzi (Rhazes), Ibn Al-Jazzar, al-Tamimi, al-Masihi, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ali ibn Ridwan, Ibn Jumay, Isaac Israeli ben Solomon, Abd-el-latif, Ibn al-Quff, and Ibn al-Nafis. Their works covered a number of subjects related to pollution such as air contamination, water contamination, soil contamination, solid waste mishandling, and environmental assessments of certain localities. [1]
This section no doubt is historically true but it is not directly associated with the history of 'environmentalism'. Ancient peoples wrote and practiced all sorts of things that could be called environmentalism but is not historically linked directly with the origins of environmentalism in the 19th C. This habit of reaching way back into the past to find 'proto-' examples of modern movements, organizations and ideas is to stretch the idea origins out of shape. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 14:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
A page on environmentalism does not have a link to recycling??? 65.125.133.211 ( talk) 18:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)