Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Environment

Schwarzenegger: The Fake Environmental Hero

By Bill Walker, Environmental Working Group. Posted April 19, 2007.


Schwarzenegger has become the GOP's Al Gore but the trouble is that his "environmentalism" isn't about curbing our reckless consumption; it's about having more cool choices -- if you can afford them.
04192007story
04192007story
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

California's governor, who was oiling his quads for the camera when Lois Gibbs was fighting a chemical catastrophe at Love Canal, is suddenly being hailed as an environmental hero.

He's the GOP's Al Gore. He's simultaneously on the covers of special green issues of Newsweek and Outside, with fawning articles and Q&As recounting how he gets policy tips from his cousin-in-law Bobby Kennedy Jr. and has one Hummer that runs on hydrogen, another on biodiesel.

He's a jet-setting green diplomat, signing global warming pacts with Canada and Britain. He's the keynote speaker at prestigious international climate change conferences.

Fine. To a point.

Arnold Schwarzenegger does seem to understand that the planet is in trouble. As a green Republican, he is a welcome contrast to the know-nothing, do-less attitude of President Bush. His movie star persona is perfect for delivering lines like "Arnold to Detroit: Get off your butt."

But when he says the problem with environmentalism is that it's not hip or sexy -- that the movement has been a failure because it's based on guilt and sacrifice, not optimism and fun -- I must respond with one of the more eloquent lines from his signature role as an android assassin:

Wrong

Here's what the governor said last week at Georgetown University:

"Pumping Iron" changed the image of body-building dramatically ... The perception of body-building began to change and it became more and more hip and more and more attractive ... It became mainstream. It became sexy, attractive. And this is exactly what has to happen with the environmental movement.

Like body-builders, environmentalists were thought of as, kind of, weird and fanatics also. You know, they're, kind of, serious tree-huggers. Environmentalists were no fun. They were like Prohibitionists at the fraternity party.

For too long, the environmental movement has been powered by guilt. But I believe that this is about the switch-over from being powered by guilt to being powered by something much more positive, something much more dynamic, something much more capable of bringing about major change ... I don't think that any movement has ever made it and has ever made much progress based on guilt. Guilt is passive, guilt is inhibiting and guilt is defensive.

You remember the commercials a number of years ago, the commercials specifically of a Native American who sees what we have done to the environment and then a tear runs down his cheek? You all remember that?

Well, let me tell you something. That approach didn't work because successful movements are built on passion; they're not built on guilt. They're built on passion, they're built on confidence and they're built on critical mass. And, often, they're built on an element of alarm that galvanizes action ... [T]he tipping point will be occurring when the environmental movement is no longer seen as a nag or as a scold, but as a positive force in people's lives.

(Disclosure: Schwarzenegger's chief speechwriter is a friend and former newspaper colleague of mine.)

Weird? Nags? Prohibitionists? Watch it, Governor, those are my people you're talking about.

I know a lot of sexy, optimistic, fun environmentalists. Some of us are not as sexy as we used to be, and decades of sounding the alarm in the deaf ears of politicians and the business community have tempered our optimism with cynicism. But we're still more fun than most people I've ever spent much time with. (Which includes politicians but not body builders and action-movie stars, so I don't know for sure how we stack up to Arnold's crowd. By all accounts, he was a real cut-up on the set.)

And passion? You haven't seen passion until you've seen kids, grownups and grandparents -- even some movie stars -- willingly go to jail for protesting nuclear weapons or toxic waste incinerators or clear-cutting.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: schwarzenegger, global warming, climate change

Bill is a native Texan in exile in California. He runs Environmental Working Group's West Coast office and writes for their Enviroblog.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Arnold showed his true colors when he vetoed the Hemp bill last year
Posted by: YinRising on Apr 19, 2007 12:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, Arnold takes one from Rove's playbook when he refers to environmentalists as prohibitionists; "Environmentalists were no fun. They were like Prohibitionists at the fraternity party." This from the man who supported Hemp Prohibition last year when he vetoed California's bill that would have allowed our farmers to grow hemp and compete with other countries like Canada and China.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/456/ california_governor_vetoes_hemp_bill
(erase space before "_california")

One can't be pro-environment and a Hemp Prohibitionist at the same time.

Hemp Prohibition from its start 70 years ago, has been nothing but a subsidy for the biggest of Chemical polluting and clearcutting corporations such as DuPont, Monsanto, and Pacific Lumber. It also belies any notion of a "free market."

While hemp farming will not stop global warming by itself, it does have an integral role to play in the healing of our Mother Earth.

http://thehia.org/
http://votehemp.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Politics always has been a beauty contest.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 19, 2007 1:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How many bathing beauties use their visibility to crusade for a better world?

Unfortunately, voters think elections are about electing the prom king, the most popular guy, the one who is going to win.

Arnold has turned that into a way to win big. He's an actor. Just as Reagan was. If not for the law, Americans would probably elect Arnold president, too.

Yes, it is necessary to pull Arnold's covers to reveal the phony underneath. Acting is phony. Reagan was a phony. Americans cannot tell the real from the phony. That's why we need the Fourth Estate doing its job and not promoting the phonys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No fan of Arnold
Posted by: Brutus on Apr 19, 2007 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but Gore's said little about curbing our reckless consumption of anything, he's just as into the bright shiny new toys as a solution as Arnold and has said little about what it would actually mean to cut our carbon consumption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No fan of Arnold Posted by: jmp3954
Arnold is right about cool choices
Posted by: silkreed on Apr 19, 2007 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To a lot of progressives it may sound offensive to hear Arnold touting the very expensive electric Tesla car as sexy, but hey, why not call LED bulbs sexy? They're very cool, and very expensive, because they're still in development. The price will come down gradually as production speeds up. Cheap alternatives *won't happen* without the rich getting in there first with the money to pay for development, same with hybrid or electric cars. Keep telling all your friends, Arnold, and thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gov. Schwarzenegger should restore California
Posted by: Aimee on Apr 19, 2007 6:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gov. Schwarzenegger has an opportunity to restore California to it's once beautiful glory of the 50s. I came to California in 1952. There were orange groves and fresh produce was grown everywhere. California is perfect for growing produce. I am sick of seeing produce from Chile at the market.

The governor should help to restore the orange groves and produce agriculture. Global Climate Change is not a joke. Stop the watering of front lawns, ban swimming pools, and give incentives for the use of solar panels and on-demand water heaters, etc. While we're at it, ban Round-Up and all chemicals that go into our water supply.

Can't be done? Well, Rizhao, China has done it. All buildings have solar panels and homes have on-demand water heaters. They are making a statement.

Come on Gov. Schwarzenegger! Show a little backbone. Restore California. Come on all governors, mayors and Pres. Bush. Global Climate Change is not a joke.

Aimee
DataOptions.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From A Californian
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Apr 19, 2007 6:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best thing Arnold can do is fund building infrastructure that supports more public transportation (trains, light rail, clean busses,small town van commuter links) and insist companies who sell gasoline in California put in place electric vehicles solar charging stations in California. California should regulate all future building to require solar, gray water, radiant floor heating, etc... affordable FOR THE MASSES, not millionaires. Arnold should promote SMALL FAMILIES in California to preserve our resources.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: From A Californian Posted by: badkitty
» badkitty!?!? Posted by: veggiegrrrl
Oh, Arnold, other ideas...
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Apr 19, 2007 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, Arnold, more ideas. Mandate organic farming in California to save our water, air, soil, birds, wildlife from pesticide poisoning. Mandate permaculture....

Vegan food in public schools so kids can nourish their brains with healthier choices than federally funded cheeze wizz and tater tots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh, Arnold, other ideas... Posted by: WitchyNy
Arnold and the ENRON CONNECTION (Arnold + His Morally Ambiguous Behavior)
Posted by: freethink7 on Apr 19, 2007 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“On May 26, 2001 Arnold met with former Enron CEO Kenneth Lay , where Lay sought support for his solution to the California energy crisis, opposing price caps on electricity and federal assistance. The Bush administration supported Lay's solution and stood by while Enron defrauded Californians out of billions. As we have seen, many officials linked with the Bush Administration have their dirty prints all over Enron, it seems Arnold does too." Source: www.arnoldexposed.com/arnold.htm

Read more about Arnold and his hideous-despicable morally ambiguous behavior at:

http://www.arnoldexposed.com/arnold.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Watch Out For Arnold Posted by: Sparks56
» RE: Watch Out For Arnold Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Watch Out For Arnold Posted by: Sparks56
McMansions Abound
Posted by: lynned2002 on Apr 19, 2007 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another trend in California that should be stopped is the building of overly huge houses. They take a ton of energy to light and heat, not to mention air condition. Everywhere I go I see them going up. No more yards or open space. It's disgusting.

How on earth did us baby boomers survive growing up in 1900 square foot houses? Oh I remember, I used to hang out in the yard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: McMansions Abound Posted by: WitchyNy
» RE: McMansions Abound Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: McMansions Abound Posted by: jmp3954
If he's the "new right", or even new center, that's good
Posted by: kevred on Apr 19, 2007 8:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find this guy pretty confounding--one minute he does something great and progressive, the next he seems to revert to painfully familiar Republican junk.

What gives me hope about him, though, is that he's a Republican governor of a large state. The last person you'd expect to be doing anything progressive. And he's still doing all kinds of things that are at least borderline pro-environment.

So if we judge him not by the standards of a liberal activist, but by the standards of a wealthy Republican tycoon, then he's suddenly doing much better. He's overseeing one of the largest and most important economies in the world, and through simple force of will is pushing green initiatives right into the heart of it. That's going to affect the practices of big business more than any of us or our complaints will, and it will ripple out from California, as everything else does. We can't get Corporate America to where we want it to be through grass-roots guilt alone. It's going to take people with power and charisma on the other side to help bookend the process.

He's no saint, is not as progressive or consistent as any of us would like him to be. But if this is the new face of moderate Republicans, then we'll be in much better shape than we've been the last 13 years or so.

I hate to hear myself accepting anything less than true progressivism in our leaders. And at the end of the day he's not satisfactory enough on his own, for everything that desperately need to be done for the environment.

But for all that we don't like about him, he's actually affecting the big picture more than any of our current leading Democrats have--tell me about the grand environmental record of Obama or Clinton or the other Dems currently clamoring for our attention!--and hopefully can be kept honest enough to keep doing something, even if it's not enough on its own.

Then again, are any of our individual actions enough, on their own?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Having Arnold for my governor is almost as bad as Bush being my president.
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 19, 2007 9:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I love living in Sunny "C," there are times when I'm too embarrassed to admit it.

That feeling comes to me each time I see Arnold on TV or read about him on the Internet. For Governor Schwarzenegger is living proof that the majority of Californians, those who voted for him, have a collective IQ equal to the median wintertime temperature here.

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Arnold for president Posted by: Swedish liberal
Cho school shooter was autistic
Posted by: anonimus1 on Apr 19, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The VT school shooter was identified as being autistic in 1992, after he came to the US. Now isn't that a testament to how we treat the mentally handicapped in this country? Rob them of their support mechanisms, so we can go to war in other countries in order to make rich people richer.

This truly makes sense.

I am going to right "RAPTURE" for president in 2008, and just get to the freaking point of it all. The neocons want to control the world and then they want to end it all for the rest of us, by selling us the Rapture.

I could probably retire from selling bumper stickers that read --

RAPTURE - SATAN'S BEST IDEA EVER
RAPTURE - Phuck Everything, 'Cuz I'm Goin' to Heaven
RAPTURE = Faith x Fear x Lack of Education
RAPTURE - Because Jesus wants you to die, too!
RAPTURE - Why not assume the worst in life?
RAPTURE - Because it's good for the economy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» SO WHAT Posted by: gellero
At least he is trying---
Posted by: WitchyNy on Apr 19, 2007 10:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where as Bush is doing NOTHING.

I am uncomfortable with the way liberals keep bashing Arnold.
Clearly they are afraid of him. (I wonder if he could get an C. Amendment passed before the next election???????)

But as a radical activist-I like him. First of all he is someone the average American will vote for. He is married to a Kenndy. (Feminist point---who I think would have MORE influence over him -than his 'brother in law')

And he is RIGHT- in the 1960's THE BEATLES were sexy and cool...and that a lot to do with the anti-war protests, the civil rights movement, and the very start of the environmental rights movement being cool too.

Yeah Yeah Yeah.

He is someone males relate to. I think Arnolds hands are tied a lot by politics. Anyone who still thinks politicians are really the ones at the top of the power system are fools.

It is the RICH. And Arnold is trying in this speech to capture the imagination of the rich- who really control things.
Good for him. I wish he could do more. I think he is trying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: At least he is trying--- Posted by: MartianBachelor
Yay, finally somebody figured out what Californians already knew
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 19, 2007 2:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But the lack of IRV let the slimest minority of votes elect such a buffoon. Camejo should've won and would have if we had IRV. But oh no! We can't have communist ideas like that floating around!

Look I'm a gear head and like cool tech too, but if the pricetag for gear is too high, and like most things lately, everything costs 300% more than it did 10 years ago with very little income increase to keep up, all the cool shit in the world isn't worth much. Until Ahnold starts talking turkey about a $10K electric vehicle for a family of 4, it's all crap, total, utter crap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Environmentalism doesn't have to be sexy
Posted by: drmeow on Apr 19, 2007 3:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... non-environmental choices have to be more expensive! The oil crisis in the 70's had people buying higher gas mileage cars and driving 55 instead of 70. The cost of products needs to include their environmental costs. Of course, that will also require social and economic justice as such an inclusion will raise all prices and you can't do that without paying people a living wage. I think if we combine those things with better environmental infrastructure (hey, lets give small Mom and Pop grocery and drug stores tax breaks to set up shop in places that don't force most of their customers drive to the edge of town to do their shopping - how's that for a concept) and information about the environment ... yes, scary information ... we'll see more changes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The thing is, for all his faults he makes a valid point
Posted by: Techubus on Apr 19, 2007 7:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm no fan of him. I thought it was a joke when he became governor of my state. I also think this new push to the center is a smoke screen, he's just learning how to play politics in a state that demands some progressive qualities in order to remain popular.

Having said that, there is considerable truth to his statements about the perception of environmentalists. I know it rubs people the wrong way to be labeled like that but take a moment and consider it. The question is not whether it was accurate to say that environmentalists are no fun or are like prohibitionists, but whether they were largely perceived that way by the American public.

I think there is little doubt that this perception was commonplace with many people. When you mention environmentalists to many people they picture exactly what he described. In my view, it is a very good thing to push environmental causes into the mainstream, make them hip and cool. Popular culture is a very powerful force, so anything to push these causes into the limelight will only help in the end. Yes, the messenger in this case is fairly disingenuous about environmentalism in my opinion, but he makes a valid point and if at the end of the day his activities help the cause more than harm it, this can only be a good thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Something to be said for this approach
Posted by: Logic's Edge on Apr 19, 2007 7:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People are more apt to do something if they're made to feel good about it than if they're made to feel badly about not doing it.

Let all the rich people buy their electric sports cars and drive down the production cost to the point where electric cars become commonplace. What's wrong with that?

Some environmentalists seemed to be fixated on having people pay for their sins and get distressed when it looks like technology may present an escape hatch. Remember the brief period when people thought cold fusion would solve all our energy problems? Were the environmentalists overjoyed then? Not all of them, that's for sure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When the wrong are right
Posted by: Gravitas on Apr 19, 2007 7:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't stand Arnold! He is one of the reasons I will not move back to California. Yet, I have to agree with him as far as guilt goes. Guilt is a counterproductive emotion! We had guilt around sex for centuries. This was especially true for the Catholic clergy who were supposed to be celebate. What did it get us? Child molesting priests. Mainstream society traded much of its traditional guilt around sex for guilt over food? What did it get us? Lots of eating disorders and a heavier population. And of course the prohibition example is true. The average Joe is to engrained in his overconsumptive ways to change. Put too much guilt on him, and he will just start listening to the Rick Bermans and other paid hacks that tell him it is all nonsense. For people to change, they need positive motivation, not someone standing behind them with a pitchfork. Then again, Hopi prophecy fortells the destruction of the world several times, only to be rebuilt again. Lets see. in modern times, we have the technology to feed the planet, but we in the Western world can only gripe we don't look like living skeletons (or pop celebrities). With electronic media, we there is no limit to the education we could attain, but we spend are time watching Paris Hilton and reality shows. Our country was revolutionary in extended democracy, yet we let Bush steal the election twice. We don't deserve the opportunities we have. Maybe the world should be destroyed so a few can start over again!

"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

*retch* stop with the "sacrifices" already
Posted by: gigawing2 on Apr 19, 2007 10:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know Arnold is a wishy washy leader who is half-Democrat and half-Republican. I know he's mostly weak on environmental issues.

But on optimism and fun, he's right and you guys are wrong. He's right that emotional stridency is the reason why reform movements are not more popular.

If you've ever been to a protest rally, surprise, the people up front are really fun and creative. That's because positivity is strength, and guilt is weakness. But it's a minority in political movements. I doubt chaining myself to a tree is fun or creative.

Likewise, that's why tyrants choose guilt and fear as weapons of choice, because it makes people go numb. You should be thankful Arnold isn't taking the tyrant route and scaring the populace into submission.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]