Comments on: What’s the opposite of environmentalist?

By: Are you a wasteroon? Readers suggest antonyms for environmentalist - Jeff McMahon - Scorched Earth - True/Slant

Mon, 09 Aug 2010 13:06:08 +0000

[...] for a functional antonym, which really shouldn’t insult anyone, a point I tried to make in my original post by disqualifying Blockheads (the antagonists of that green pioneer, Gumby, and his horse, Pokey). [...]

By: Opposite of “environmentalist”? « Dave Domingo Untitled Blog Project

Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:16:26 +0000

[...] of “environmentalist”? By davedomingo Comments in Jeff McMahon’s Scorched Earth blog on antonyms for [...]

By: Jeff McMahon

Jeff McMahon — Tue, 19 May 2009 01:51:58 +0000

Thank you, Larry, and it’s good to hear from you. I’m afraid I’ve just come upon your comment or else I would have included it in the followup to this story:

http://trueslant.com/jeffmcmahon/2009/05/18/opposite-of-environmentalist/

Next time! (Because it certainly seems there will be a next time. We’ve not yet found the perfect antonym.)

By: lrallen24

lrallen24 — Sat, 16 May 2009 01:05:34 +0000

Hey Jeff,
Good to see you’re name in print again! When I first became active in environmentalism James Watt was Reagan’s Secretary of the Interior, and he most certainly represented the opposite of an environmentalist. His whole theory was that the earth was given to us to exploit. Given that, I think “Exploitationist” could be an appropriate moniker.

I look forward to reading future posts from you!

Larry Allen
SLO

By: Jeff McMahon - Scorched Earth - Chicago’s new monster Whole Foods caters to the automobile - True/Slant

Fri, 15 May 2009 15:57:00 +0000

[...] into carts pushed by the well-heeled, and thus encouraging a thriving market for them (proving that capitalist is not the opposite of environmentalist), the Whole Foods will be built with the materials that the Earth most gently offers up to [...]

By: bobshanbrom

bobshanbrom — Thu, 14 May 2009 21:33:25 +0000

The underlying difference, in the least judgmental terms, would be that environmentalists believe in good stewardship and the others have faith that “the Lord will provide”. So I would say that an antonym most likely to find acceptable currency would be in this realm. Maybe “providentialist” or “provisionist.”
You’d need a different, stronger word for those, like Dick Cheney, who know that we’re on a path to doom and yet don’t care. Maybe “Satanist.”

By: Jeff McMahon

Jeff McMahon — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:54:05 +0000

I hope someone can be a luxurist (hedonist?) and an environmentalist too.

By: davedomingo

davedomingo — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:18:49 +0000

Finding one-word terms that focus on the competing values (rather than a universal antonym) seems much more workable.

If a person doesn’t care much or do much about the environment, what does he/she care about more, or do instead? That’s probably the kind of “-ist” he/she is.

Your term “consumist” is apt, but if people consume too much or in an irresponsible way, it’s probably driven by some more specific value — like getting a good deal (“frugalist”), saving time or energy (“convenientist”), or living the ‘good life’ (“luxurist”). Know what I mean?

Fun topic. Thanks again.

By: Jeff McMahon

Jeff McMahon — Thu, 14 May 2009 18:27:38 +0000

Thank you for these thoughts, Dave. You bring up an important point about generality. But I also have trouble finding fitting antonyms for more specific versions of the term, like someone who wants to preserve natural places (a preservationist), or someone who wants to conserve natural resources (a conservationist). What is someone who wants to consume them (a consumist?). It seems to me that “environmentalist” expresses a more general attitude toward the natural world.

By: davedomingo

davedomingo — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:09:07 +0000

Hi, Jeff. John McIntyre mentioned your question in his blog.

I think the only way to accurately name the opposite of something as specific as “environmentalist” is to put “non-” in front of it.

Trying to identify *the* opposite of “environmentalist,” or of any similar “-ist” term, is problematic for two main reasons:

1. The “-ist” term is seldom specific enough, so we don’t know what we are looking for the opposite of.

In the matter you have raised, an environmentalist can be a person who simply *cares* about environmental matters, a person who *believes in taking action* to protect the environment (eco-protection), a person who *does take action* to protect the environment, or something else.

The opposites of the types I mentioned are, respectively: someone apathetic about environmental concerns, someone who does not believe in taking action to protect the environment, and someone who does not take action.

2. If a person is not in a given “-ist” group, it may be because he/she is apathetic, neutral with respect to action, or supportive (to some degree) of interests that conflict with the “-ist” cause.

In short, environmentalism has multiple non-supporting forces, some of which are actually opposing forces.

Thanks for asking a though-provoking question. Sorry I couldn’t answer it directly!