Faith, Beer, and Other Things That Interest Geoff

Like Paul Hansen, Van Putten argues that environmental values are not necessarily “liberal” or “progressive,” as those terms are presently understood. “In fact, they are inherently conservative, involving individuals’ responsibilities to others.” He proceeds to survey the entire conservative coalition with a view toward demonstrating common ground. Religious conservatives advocate stewardship of creation. Fiscal conservatives oppose environmentally damaging agricultural and energy subsidies, not to mention water development projects. Free-market conservatives support innovative market-based, cost-effective solutions to environmental challenges. Pro-life conservatives embrace a comprehensive culture of life, throughout the life cycle, and appreciate non-human life, too.
...
Van Putten’s essay strongly urges environmental groups to reach out to conservatives in order to rebuild “a bipartisan grassroots consensus for conservation.” But such a dialogue must be a genuine conversation, not a focus group to massage a predetermined message for the same regulatory solutions. “Too little attention has been paid to developing an open-ended, values-based dialogue with conservatives that does not presuppose specific policy outcomes.”

Van Putten proposes breaking the social isolation of the environmental movement as well. He points out that the leadership of environmental organizations remain largely white. He argues that this was due to a misperception that African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, and other ethnic groups have other priorities. He does not say it, but he presumably means economic or civil-rights priorities.