I can't speak for him either, but I'll speak for those of us who are against destroying the environment but won't use the word environmentalist as it, like the word organic and the word christian, have been co-opted by evil bastards with corporate control agendas. Screw all that. It is impossible to take "environmentalism" seriously as a movement when you have people like Al Gore respected, and the Goldman Sachs controlled Carbon exchanges the purpose of which is obvious and it's not to reduce needless consumption.
Is libertarianism defined by Ayn Rand? Is capitalism defined by Donald Trump? Let's put Gore aside for a minute, and focus on the core issues. An environmentalist is someone who, fundamentally, sees the protection of the environment (for practical and/or idealogical reasons) as one of our most serious responsibilities. To say that certain people who identify with the movement are wrong, therefore the movement is wrong, is to say you can't believe in animal rights without being a PETA supporter. It's just a terribly flawed argument. Flipping it on it's head, I could say that environmentalism is beyond reproach because it has people like David Suzuki [1] as its champions. Those arguments simply don't hold water.
The deal with this is that I am an environmentalist in the traditional sense. I have an extremely low "carbon footprint" but not because I believe in the Goldman Sachs propaganda of doom. However, far less that 5% of "Environmentalists" I have ever met practice what they preach. It is a religion of mass hypocrisy, just like "Christianity", which likewise has almost nothing at all to do with its defined core teachings. Therefore, it is foolish to apply these labels anymore to the cause or belief or movement or whatever you want to call it.
One can be or be not. Talk is bullcrap. "Environmentalism" is about talk and politics and taking control away from people and their lives, and it's about making money. It's not about reducing consumption and waste. Not at all.
You also bring up PeTA. Let's instead talk about the label "Animal Rights Activist". I am opposed to factory farms and slaughterhouses where animals are abused and tortured for profit. I'd like to see all of these either reformed or shut down. The abuse of animals is so severe that I consider it completely unethical to eat products from these places. As a result, since I am a omnivore and veganism made me sick, I have to raise and hunt my own meat because that I have control over and can do so in as ethical and humane a manner as possible. Yes it involves killing but I do so with respect for the animal and its life. Those I raise have a good life before slaughter. I would much rather just buy humanely raised meat, that would be less trouble, but it's not possible in the US. Few others do this, that is their own business. But am I an "Animal Rights Activist"? Absolutely not. That is a label of cranks who do things like set fire to cars and destroy perfectly good fur coats. PeTA kills 85% of the animals it rescues. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/04/27/peta-and-eu...)
Likewise with consumption. Wow it would be nice to drive around and fly and use air conditioning. Does your place of work have air conditioning? Mine does not because I choose not do do so because it is wasteful compared to a fan. Do you drive to work every day? I don't because it is outrageous to think that personal gas combustion vehicles is sustainable, and electric hybrids with their batteries are even worse. Do you raise most of your own food? I do. Screw the environmentalists, driving from meeting to meeting in their gas guzzling leaded gasoline running VW busses, and their private jets, and their olympic sized heated swimming pools, their destruction of the soil with their ethanol gas, their wasteful solar panels, and their refusal to get control over their own waste while they dare to dictate to others. The world would be better off without any of those outrageous hypocrites. The term "Environmentalist" has become an insult thanks to their efforts.
Among these is Suzuki, a major leader of outrageous hypocrites. Rather than address his own wasteful consumption, he buys religious indulgences in the form of carbon credits to "offset" his waste. This is complete nonsense and those who participate in these scams are either deluded followers, or cult leaders trying to confuse their followers by example.
I'm done with the ideological purity tests of environmentalism; it's time for pragmatic engineering to take the helm. If you ask me, this guy should be the head of the new environmentalist movement: http://fora.tv/2011/06/27/Peter_Kareiva_Conservation_in_the_...
Wait, what? Why would environmentalists build oil wells? That's precisely the opposite of caring about the environment. Unchecked human development is recklessly irresponsible. But growth and development aren't necessarily evil - far from it. Understanding the ENTIRE impact of ones actions, rather than just the portion that affect you, is (imo) the most important tenet of protecting the world we live in. From that perspective, you can make intelligent decisions and grow, but not at the expense of everyone around you.
Umm, plenty of environmentalists do build power plants, solar wind etc. However, I can't see any way that drilling for oil is 'good' for the environment.
