The type of rigid thinking and refusal to countenance dissent discussed in the previous post isn't rare or a quirk of climate hysterics, it is pervasive among the do gooder types that are attracted to social issues. That the environment in general and climate change in particular have become the focus of do gooders can be confusing since they have little or no real knowledge or interest in the environment, it's just an excuse to hector society.

Once they have an expert and authoritative dogma - whether it makes any sense or is verified over time or not - they seek to enact restrictions and then all become proctologists, determined to inspect every nook for infractions, crawling up society's butt in hot pursuit of those whose normal behaviors have been criminalized.

Anders Sandberg's posts about these issues, contrasting the behaviors of the Extreme Green Guerrillas (EGG), who among other things insert an earring at 20 that will euthanize them painlessly at 40, with more sensible systems such as single stream recycling. The EGGs live crippled lives filled with ideological fervor but are ineffective, and in truth parasitic on the infrastructure they claim to work against.

Anything that forces people to change their habits or expend extra time, money or energy will fail unless it is rigidly enforced (which is how recycling is often handled - including measures such as spy cameras recording "criminals" that make mistakes in what goes where or ex-police "trash spies" that monitor the recycling) or people are as ideological as the EGGs. But the majority will never be that radical, and hence green solutions have to be convenient. Single stream recycling does not require the dedication of the EGGs, yet it provides a major environmental benefit.

There are likely many other "unbelievable" solutions to environmental problems. It is interesting to see how quickly the idea of carbon sequestration has gone from laughable to seriously considered - even if it never works out it shows how easy an environmental debate can get locked into a standard solution set (and where are the well-funded studies of how to adapt societies to climate change? Again, something which ought to be an obvious response has largely been ignored). Genetically modified organisms, whether for fuel production, manufacture or safety could fulfill a host of very green purposes - but they will of course have to overcome a compact ideological resistance that is likely more based on values than any rational facts.

It isn't that more effective solutions such as single stream recycling and carbon sequestration are unbelievable, it is that they are unimaginable and undesirable to do gooders since people are not required to change their habits. There are no opportunities for hectoring, no work for trash spies and the like, and no public spectacle. No one is criminalized. There is no satisfaction.

If we are sincerely concerned about environmental issues we must be quite firm in rejecting the policies proposed by do gooders. Such policies are almost never effective, which delays or prevents adoption of more effective policies. Besides, they degrade society, harm the social mind, and that has dire and long term consequences. It is social vandalism and we would do well to suppress it as much as possible. We'll always have do gooders, there's no cure for this social disease, but discussing it openly and taking steps to prevent infection and harm are just good social hygiene.