Personally, I agree with the general thrust of the article (it was, however, written provocatively and got the response expected).

Justin’s arguments are not new, but worth keeping in mind if you have high environmental values and wish for ‘something’ to be done about it. Part of the reason environmentalists are unsuccessful so often is that they stress the value of the environment for the environment’s sake. Making a better connection to, and publicising, the value to other people derived from these areas of concern may be a more effective approach.

BBasher - I don't quite know what you are referring to by "hyperbolic nonsense" but I can assure you that misanthropy is certainly not a minor issue in today's Green movement.

Despite this being a less than perfect article and the fact that the author makes some outlandish statements, he is certainly aware of the danger of scientifically unfounded eco-totalitarianism funded by substantial new taxes such as the ETS.

If you think that the author's fear of "facism" is unlikely you should be aware that David Suzuki, for example,wants dissenters jailed which is quite a startling comment in itself. Ultimately this issue is all about wealth and its redistribution the issue of climate is simply a convenient way for a new left elite to seek power.

Bushbasher:

I think you miss the point “Negative Liberty” is a term attributed to Isaiah Berlin. It is a series of chapter headings under which we can discuss ideas of individual freedom and decision making, ownership and control of private property, the defence of capitalism, ideas of justice and equality before the law and so on.

“Positive Liberty” on the other hand is the chapter headings in which one discusses tyranny, collectivism, authority and hierarchy.

Those critics of capitalist society who ignore the power of Adam Smith “invisible hand” are at the extreme risk of experiencing his “invisible foot” on their back side.

gee, i'm missing a lot of points today.

atman, i agree the author has a point, the point you made. and i agree that there is an anti-human strain to green politics. but it is only a strain. it is vastly overrated in number and power, by the author and by idiots like cheryl screaming about eco-fascists.

as for the hyperbolic nonsense, if you can't already see it, i doubt anything i say will help. but you can tell me where the cuyahoga river fits into jefferson's cute values calculus.

anti-green, berlin or not, it's a slogan. no one is denying the "invisible hand". i'm simply denying that anything of substance follows from reciting slogans. i just don't think "minimal governmental coercion and as far as possible free markets" means anything, unless you make some attempt to quantify "minimal" and "possible".

but you can help. just tell me which society, past or present, that you regard as closest to your libertarian paradise. then i can have some sense of what you are actually wishing for.

Jeff,
Don't give up your day job.

This would get a fail at year 11.

Starts with dubious assumptions and goes down hill from there.
Your "facts" are selective to support the above assumption .

Like the first commenter said bad Sophistry

Garry in Liffey, Ho Hum, mikk, Ludwig, bushbasher and examinator.

Of course none of you live in houses, sleep in pyjamas, eat commercially produced food or goods, use cars, consume electricity or especially communicate by computer. If you do and then attempt to reject the arguments presented by the author then you open yourselves up to all sorts of ridicule and ascusations.