Why is the Liberal Environmentalist Movement Takes Refuge in the Big Cities?

In my life I have had the opportunity to live in one of America’s smallest of towns–Strafford, MO which had a population of less than 500 people when I moved there as a child. I have lived in St. Louis county, which can be considered a larger-middle sized American metropolis, and I have lived in America’s third largest city, Chicago. I have drawn the conclusion that liberals are really screwed up in the places they decide to gather, live, and preach their misguided rhetoric.

Modern-day liberalism is being driven by environmental policies. If you don’t believe me, look at the stimulus bill and the billions spent for windmills which will never produce enough power to efficiently power a liberal city like Chicago. (They have failed in doing so all over the world, so why would they work suddenly here?) Look at the reasons we are given for not drilling for our own oil. We have to protect an area which 99 percent of the liberals speaking up will never leave their urban existence to see. We are told we must get rid of the SUV and drive Smart Cars because they have bought into rhetoric which has made the leader of their movement, Al Gore, very rich. It’s hard to deny the modern liberal movement is driven by environmentalism, and I would go as far as tying communism to all of this as well (but that’s a different blog already developed in the archives of BBCW.)

Why is it liberals flock to the big cities like Chicago, where capitalism has taken a worthless marsh and built the tallest buildings representing the American spirit so many liberals detest? Why is it they go where the buildings block the views of the sunsets and the traffic exhausts pollute their air? They preach against all of this stuff. They have been known to tie themselves to trees to prevent new construction, but yet they worship and study their environmentalism in a place where man has proven he is the ultimate ruler. This doesn’t seem very PETA to me.

I have seen my share of environmentalists protesting on the streets of Michigan Avenue in Chicago. I often engaged in debate with them and quickly hushed them up. What is it about the cement, asphalt, and the tall buildings that attract these nature lovers to set up a protest in front of Lord & Taylor’s to protest furs in their Dr. Martens made from cow skin once covered in cow fur. (True story and that debate lasted all of 5 seconds before the protester got mad and wouldn’t talk to me. Since you may be curious, I walked up a group of PETA people protesting Lord & Taylor’s line of fur coats. I quickly analyzed the situation, and notice a few of them were wearing real leather shoes. I simply asked one of them why it was okay for him to wear cow skin but not okay for Lord and Taylor to sell rabbit skins. He got mad. Liberals…)

Then there’s us dumb-country bumpkins (rednecks) living in the places the libs want to protect. Because we don’t live in upper Manhattan or drink coffee in shop in downtown Seattle, we are looked down upon by the liberal establishment. Why is this? They are the ones who claim they are in touch with the land we live on–the land we enjoy and use with respect. They wouldn’t know what to do with this land and the opportunities the land gives–yet they consider themselves the intelligence of the nation. What intelligence is there when you live in the very places which were built with the philosophies you speak out against. I don’t get it.

The urban liberal environmental movement consists of people who know the places in their speeches from coffee table books sitting at a Starbucks outside of Central Park. They may jump up to Vermont for the weekend, but they are quickly returned to the big city. Would someone please tell me what I am missing here? How can you be in touch with environmentalism if your environment is man-made?

———————————————————————————————————-

Originally posted at Bungalow Bill’s Conservative Wisdom

GHTime Code(s): 3636e

Link to this page