How tree-Hugging hippies are destroying our environment

A typical dirty/ignorant hippie

Among tree-hugging hippies (Figure 1), there is a common sentiment that capitalism is inherently evil and will result in the destruction of our environment.   I’ve argued with some of these hippies before, and tried to explain to them that countries with free market systems (such as the U.S. and Japan) typically have much better environmental quality then countries with centrally-planned economies (such as China and the former Soviet Union).  Apparently, their marijuana-addled brains are immune to reason, because this black-and-white argument always fails to convince them.  The fact of the matter is, environmental destruction is not a preordained outcome with capitalist systems; but in fact, free market economies may be a necessity for us to save our environment.

Saint Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate

First off, let’s examine the actual definition of capitalism.  If you were to ask a dirty, tree-hugging hippie to define capitalism, he or she would likely respond thusly:  “hey man…capitalism is like…uh…where greedy people totally get more money while the lower classes…are like, downtrodden and stuff.  Can you…uh…pass the bong to me, dude?”  For those of you who don’t speak hippie-bonics, this dirty hippie is basically trying to say that capitalism is a system based on greed, whereas wealthy people attempt to accumulate ever-increasing amounts of capital, at the expense of the lower classes.  This kind of talk would make Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman (known at the Hall as ‘Saint Milton’ (Figure 2) roll in his grave!  In his seminal work Capitalism and Freedom, Saint Milton defines capitalism as “the organization of the bulk of economic activity through private enterprise operating in a free market.”  At its heart, capitalism isn’t about greedy people trying to accumulate more wealth at the expense of other people; it is the freedom of people to voluntarily exchange goods and services, without coercion or the influence of external forces.

Let’s take a closer look at the concept of “greed” and how it relates to economic systems.  Your typical stinky hippie believes that industries should be owned by “the people,” so that the industries will act in a way that maximizes benefits to the public good.  They don’t seem to make the connection that ownership by “the people” actually means ownership by “the government.”  And it doesn’t take a Nobel laureate economist to realize that people working for the government are not immune from greed!  Are the rulers of China’s communist industries not influenced by greed?  Are all the managers and bureaucrats of the U.S. Department of Health and Human services completely free of greed?  People everywhere, regardless if they are working for a private business or the government, are motivated by their own self-interests—this is the definition of greed.

Hoover Dam, Nevada

People acting in their own self-interests can lead to environmental degradation in both capitalist and state-run systems, there’s no doubt about it.  But when the government assumes the role of private industry, environmental destruction tends to dramatically increase.  For example, from the 1930’s to the 1970’s the U.S. federal government undertook a rash of dam building (Figure 3).  The agencies in charge of dam building (the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation) were created to act in the public good. However, the power-hungry bureaucrats in charge of these agencies disregarded the needs of the public, and locked themselves in a competition to see which agency could build the most dams.  Now don’t get me wrong, dams aren’t always bad; they provide valuable public services such as flood control and electric power, but building dams incurs extremely large monetary and environmental costs.  As it turns out, the leaders and employees of these government agencies were so enchanted with dam building that they often presented skewed cost-benefit analyses (or none at all), in order to build more dams.  Many of these dams that were constructed had relatively low societal value compared to their enormous monetary and environmental costs.  Had dam construction been left to the free market, the dams that were not cost effective would not have been built, and many of our river systems would be in much better shape today.

All around the globe, there are countless examples of the massive environmental destruction that occurs in countries with government-controlled economies.  One of the clearest examples is from post-World War II Germany.  After the war, West Germany adopted a capitalist free-market system, while East Germany was forced to adopt a communist model by their Soviet overlords.  People of the same civilization, value system, level of education, and technical skill resided on both sides of the wall.  But while West Germany was able to maintain a moderately healthy environment, thick clouds of smog and toxic waste degraded the environment of East Germany.  Today, 17 years after reunification, a sizeable portion of German payroll taxes is allocated towards cleaning up the environment of this former “worker’s paradise.”

I’m certainly not trying to argue that governments shouldn’t act to improve environmental quality.  There are many examples of our government making appropriate environmental policies, such as enacting pollution taxes.  But when government attempts to side-step the free market to provide specific solutions to environmental and natural resource problems, unintended adverse consequences often result.  One obvious example of this is the energy crisis in the 1970’s.

In the early 1970’s, the OPEC cartel drastically cut oil production, which caused a substantial increase in the price of crude.  In an unhindered free market, an increase in the cost of an energy source causes users to economize their usage, and provides an incentive to industry to seek new energy sources and develop more energy-efficient products.  Instead of allowing this important process to happen unfettered, the federal government instituted price controls to protect the “American working family.”  This shortsighted action discouraged exploration of other sources of oil, and reduced investments by industry in developing fuel-efficient products.  Due in a large part to our government’s past and present actions to subsidize and control the costs of energy, the U.S. lags far behind Japan and Western Europe in energy efficiency, and we have experienced decreased worldwide demand for U.S. manufactured products (such as automobiles).  How the hell has this benefited the “American working family?”

Neo-hippie presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich

“Now Max,” you’re probably thinking, “I see how hippies believe in government-controlled economies, which result in environmental destruction.  But our great government certainly isn’t going to take policy advice from a bunch of stinky drug addicts!”  I completely agree.  But today’s hippie isn’t like the long-haired, tie dye- wearing hippie of yore.  Today’s hippies (which I call ‘neo-hippies’) have short hair and wear normal clothes, and can be found working in schools, the hall of our government, and even the offices of corporate America (Figure 4).  These neo-hippies are teaching children and ignorant adults that political action and government ownership of industry is the only solution for environmental problems, and that the free market is incapable of providing environmental solutions.  The neo-hippies must be stopped, before they completely destroy our environment!

A smog-choked Chinese city

 Now, men and women of Arthur’s Hall, I call upon you for action!  It’s time that we face these neo-hippies head on.  Here’s some ideas: carry a picture of a smog-choked Chinese city in your wallet, and the next time you hear some hippie bitching about how corporate American is destroying our environment, show them the environmental consequences of a government - controlled economy! (Figure 5)  Read Capitalism and Freedom, so that you can enlighten these irrational hippies with the progressive ideas of Saint Milton!  Spread these words of truth, brothers and sisters: there is no other economic system that is more effective at avoiding and solving environmental problems than free market capitalism.

Recommended Reading
Cadillac Desert: The American West and its Disappearing Water (1986) by Marc Reisner
Capitalism and Freedom (1962) by Milton Friedman.
Free To Choose (1979) by Milton and Rose Friedman.

About the Author
Max the Metrosexual resides in Washington State, and is a graduate student in Natural Resource Management.  His interests include guns, weightlifting, and men’s fashion accessories.

-Max the Metrosexual