🔴 Website 👉 https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram 👉 https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
Green ideology is anti-Western at its core.
February 20, 2026 by Bruce Thornton 10 Comments
Order Jamie Glazov’s new book, ‘United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny, Terror, and Hamas’: HERE.
One of Barack Obama’s most dangerous efforts to “fundamentally transform the United States” is what the Wall Street Journal dubbed “his so-called endangerment finding that declared greenhouse gas emissions a threat to public health and safety.”
“Cue the apocalyptic warnings unhinged from reality,” the Wall Street Journal continued. “What progressives really fear is that they won’t be able to dictate the energy supplies, cars and appliances that Americans can buy.”
The Trump EPA’s recent repeal of Obama’s “finding” hopefully will be a harbinger of the end of global warming’s malign rein.
From its beginning, the theory that atmospheric CO2 caused by human emissions threatens our existence, was the poisoned fruit of scientism, not science, and at best a mere weak theory dressed up in the jargon and quantitative data of real science.
This theory’s purpose has been to serve leftist political ideologies, by creating what Obama henchman Rahm Emmanuel called a “serious crisis you never want to waste,” and so lose “an opportunity to do things that you think you could not before,” usually because they violate the Constitution.
For example, implementing government laws and regulations that raise the price of gasoline, or coerce automobile makers to produce more electric-powered vehicles. There are few material things that Americans prize more than the vehicles they drive and the abundant, cheap energy and fuel that allows that to happen. Using catastrophic, apocalyptic global warming to get their attention and support for new regulations is the ginned up “serious crisis” that the Obama administration used to get consumers in line.
Then there’s the carrot: federal and state grants, loans, and tax breaks to encourage production and increase sales of electric vehicles. Until recently, all these government bribes have worked pretty well in roping voters into the electric energy grift, and putting up with more government rules and regulations that push green energy with Disneyesque idealizations of nature.
Another recruiter for Green energy policies––especially for the political left and other members of the “intelligentsia”––are the Europeans. For some Americans, Europeans always seemed sophisticated and au courant, so Europe’s eager adoption of Green policies such as replacing all automobiles with EVs and creating a “net-zero” economy must be a moral imperative––even though such folly is sending Europe’s economies back to the fiscal stone-age.
Even more dangerous has been the symbiosis of Green schemes with Marxist political parties, ideologies, and policies. Green political parties are at first glance very diverse, from “deep” greens and “shallow” greens to “red” greens (or “watermelons”: green on the outside, red on the inside) more closely aligned with the traditional left. Whatever these differences, however, all Greens embrace similar ideas and values that derive from one of the West’s most popular pseudo-religions, romantic environmentalism.
Rather than a concern for resource management and protection of the environment, romantic environmentalism is a wholesale critique of science, technology and free-market capitalism. As such, Green ideology is anti-Western at its core. According to Andrew Dobson’s Green Political Thought (3rd edition), the Greens represent a “challenge to the political, social and scientific consensus that has dominated the last two or three hundred years of public life.”
Part of the Green complaint is directed at the humanistic individualism that characterizes bourgeois society and undergirds modern science. Dobson continues, Greens want to “decenter the human being, to question mechanistic science, and to refuse to believe that the world was made for human beings.” They believe that selfish individualism, abetted by science, has created consumer capitalism and a material affluence that is not “sustainable” because it depends on plundering the finite resources of nature, and it alienates people from their natural identities.
In short, radical environmentalism is, like Marxism, a type of antihumanism that reduces our humanity into disposable tools to be reprogrammed or eliminated to serve the ends of leftist ideologies––by “any means necessary.”
The other insult on the Global Warming injury is pointed out by the Wall Street Journal: “Most of the ‘science’ in the Obama finding is debatable, as the Trump team notes. The impact of greenhouse gases on global temperatures is intermediated by such factors as cloud cover and urbanization, and the effect on storms is disputed. In any event, curbing CO2 emissions in the U.S. will have scant impact on climate because emissions are rapidly rising in China, India and developing countries.”
And as usual, the Journal continues, “The real import of the [CO2 endangerment] finding was to give the Obama and Biden teams legal license to mandate electric cars and force fossil-fuel power plants to shut down. Trump EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has moved to roll back the Biden regulatory overreaches. But as long as the endangerment finding is in effect, a future Democratic President could reimpose the Biden climate diktats and go even further—say, by banning petroleum-powered lawn mowers and gas space heaters or stoves.”
In other words, the “finding” is a weapon for achieving partisan ideological evasions of the Constitution’s structures for protecting our unalienable rights and personal freedoms, in order to give more power to technocratic elites––the essence of tyranny.
Finally, romantic environmentalism, the idealization of nature that indulges the “pathetic fallacy,”––Victorian critic John Ruskin’s phrase for the habit of Romantic poets to attribute human attributes, emotions, and conduct to inhuman nature–– and what Theodore Roosevelt called “nature fakery,” which made romantic writers “an object of derision to every scientist worthy of the name, to every real lover of the wilderness, to every faunal naturalist, to every true hunter or nature lover.”
Rather than recognizing nature’s “fierce eternal destruction,” as John Keats put it, a bit of “nature fakery” that happens to be true of humanity’s experience with nature, and still does in undeveloped nations, many of whom are being denied the abundant, cheap fossil fuels by the West’s scientism about “global warming”––or more honest, “anthropocentric, catastrophic global warming,” which claims the dubious, unproven notion that human behavior is driving us to destruction.
For the rich West, however, nature is still what Joseph Conrad called “the shackled form of a conquered monster,” its destructiveness tamed and domesticated in order to benefit human beings. Today, technology and science have further liberated us––not completely, of course––from most of nature’s tyranny and indifference to this one small, weak, slow, puny species that, as Apollo says in the Iliad, “live like leaves now flourishing full of fire . . . and now wither and perish.”
In other words, we can afford to idealize and romanticize nature because we are protected from its destructive powers that science and technology have tamed and controlled.
Another factor creating “nature fakery” is the liberation of the great majority of Westerners from the endless drudgery of growing and producing food, which before the modern period required the lion’s share of human labor, but takes only a fraction of us today to farm, and much of that fraction comprising immigrants. This means that few Westerners in our times know firsthand, as farmers do, nature’s fickle cruelty and indifference to our survival or misery.
Once more, President Trump is correcting the leftist Dems’ attempts to weaken the Constitutional guardrails of our rights and freedoms so their technocratic, regulatory ideology can flourish. Now’s the time for the Supreme Court to undo its Massachusetts v. EPA decision’s insult to the Constitution and common sense.
Bruce S. Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an emeritus professor of classics and humanities at California State University, Fresno, and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. His latest book is Democracy’s Dangers and Discontents: The Tyranny of the Majority from the Greeks to Obama.
Source: Frontpage Magazine
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://peckford42.wordpress.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.