August 21, 2011

Why Environmentalism Is Conservative

Have conservatives abandoned their roots as environmental leaders? David Biello investigates

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Earth

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Some politicians seem to have it in for the environment these days. Whether its presidential hopeful Rick Perry denouncing climate science as a quote "cult" or his more moderate peer Jon Huntsman calling for environmental regulations to be put on hold until the economy improves, it's clear that protecting our air, water and other natural resources is no longer fashionable.

But their Grand Old Party actually started environmental protection in the first place. Richard Nixon signed into law most of the nation's landmark environmental laws and founded the Environmental Protection Agency back in 1970.

A bit further back, Teddy Roosevelt founded the national park system, among other efforts to conserve the natural heritage of the United States.

Of course, there are politicians on both sides of the aisle interested in preserving the environment and some conservatives accept the preponderance of scientific evidence on human-caused climate change, like Huntsman. And it's not like Democrats never despoil. Witness the long-standing protection of coal mining by virtually all West Virginia politicians.

But for the moment, some conservatives seem to have forgotten that conservation is inherently conservative.

—David Biello

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American