Environmentalism as quasi-religion
In a January 2023 episode, host Bob Zadek told guest Mike Munger that environmentalism’s core principles “crash into” and “contradict every concept of sound economic thinking,” and that no one has made an economic case for it, only quasi-religious appeals to “save the planet,” “save the whale,” “save the polar bear.” The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023) Munger, a professor of political science, economics, and public policy at Duke University, agreed that environmentalists have “fetishize[d]” garbage, turning it into “religious tokens,” and described their worldview as a “murky view of Gaia, the Earth Mother, a kind of quasi-religious worship.” He argued that in a religion, adherents are not interested in doing things for themselves but in sacrificing, and that environmental sacrifice—giving up nuclear power plants, cars, and warmth—leads to policies that use more fossil fuel and create more carbon. The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023)
In a follow-up episode the next day, Munger elaborated that environmentalists are not primarily concerned about future generations of humans but about “the welfare of the planet,” “the welfare of non-human species,” and “the purity of oceans.” He compared environmentalism to the Marvel villain Thanos, calling him “a perfect environmentalist” who cares only about the universe itself, not future people, and said that “at its core, environmentalism hates humanity.” Is Environmentalism a Religious Movement? (2023)
Sacrifice versus investment
Zadek told Munger that “sacrifice” is “a magic word in discussing environmentalism,” explaining that it means “do without” and, in its “bloodiest meaning,” killing somebody to curry favor with the gods. He said environmentalism asks people to “do without something today because…” but the “because” is never finished except in vague terms like “save the planet.” The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023) Munger distinguished sacrifice from cost or investment: saving money to buy a house or taking less so one’s children have a better life is an investment, not a sacrifice. A sacrifice, he said, “must be literally wasted,” like burning a fatted calf on an altar as a sign of devotion. Is Environmentalism a Religious Movement? (2023)
Zadek described environmentalism as “the mother of all wealth transfers,” transferring wealth from the present to the future, and asked why he should be persuaded to live worse so that someone he will never meet a thousand years from now will theoretically live better. The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023) Munger responded that environmentalists are not primarily concerned with future humans but with the planet itself, and that they want the world to be unchanged. He noted that “there’s one resource we can’t make more of, Bob, and that is time,” and that environmentalists want us to sacrifice time, which we cannot get back, to show love for the environment. Is Environmentalism a Religious Movement? (2023)
Recycling and landfill mythology
Munger argued that the belief in a landfill shortage is a myth. He said that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the EPA reported that many landfills were closing because they were unsafe and leaking poisonous chemicals. Small, unlicensed landfills were closed, and hundreds of new landfills with rubber seals underneath were built. According to Munger, “we have 50% more landfill space than we had in 1980” and “there is no landfill shortage in the United States.” The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023)
Munger called recycling “a religious sacrifice to show that you care about the environment” and said it is “actually environmentally wasteful because it’s a huge waste of energy.” He stated that “the energy we waste on recycling is criminal” and that “if you care about the environment, you should outlaw recycling tomorrow.” The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023) Zadek added that the word “shortage” has almost no meaning in economics, since it really means price, not quantity, and that supply and demand ensure there is always exactly enough. He also praised the landfill example as showing that science and industry can solve problems—like leaching—by developing solutions such as rubber liners, rather than despoiling future generations. The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023)
Germany’s nuclear shutdown
Munger used Germany as a case study. He said Germany worried about nuclear waste from its nuclear power plants, and protests demanded shutting them down “in order to save the environment.” But if the goal is to conserve resources, he argued, you would want to continue using nuclear power. After Germany closed its nuclear plants, it was forced to run natural gas for electricity, and because of the war in Russia and Ukraine, the price rose substantially. Munger said he has seen estimates that Germany is using nearly three times as much fossil fuel as before it closed its nuclear plants. The ‘Broken Window Fallacy’ is Back (2023)
The broken window fallacy and green jobs
In the January 16, 2023 episode, Zadek connected environmentalism to the broken window fallacy described by Frédéric Bastiat. He cited a 21st-century president saying “Let’s destroy wealth to create jobs” as an example of the fallacy, and said that since humans consume oxygen and expel CO2, environmentalism ought to say every time we kill someone, the environment is better off. Is Environmentalism a Religious Movement? (2023) Munger agreed that environmentalists have turned garbage into religious tokens and that the sacrifice of giving up nuclear power, cars, and warmth leads to policies that use more fossil fuel and create more carbon. Is Environmentalism a Religious Movement? (2023)
Across episodes
The topic of environmentalism appears in the January 14, 2017 episode with Dr. Tom Palmer, where it is listed among topics including self-control, state-control, and property rights, but the excerpt provides no substantive discussion of environmentalism. Dr. Tom Palmer on Self Control vs. State Control (2017) The two January 2023 episodes with Mike Munger develop the argument in detail, with the second episode repeating much of the first’s material on sacrifice, recycling, and Germany’s nuclear shutdown. The later treatment adds Munger’s comparison of environmentalists to Thanos and his statement that environmentalism hates humanity, but the core economic critique remains consistent across both episodes.
What the sources do not cover
The excerpts do not provide a definition of environmentalism from its proponents, nor do they include any guest who defends environmental policies on economic grounds. The sources do not state the name of any bill, case, or amendment related to environmental law, nor do they give the founding date or principles of any environmental organization. The excerpts also do not cover the scientific evidence for or against global warming beyond Munger’s stipulation for the sake of argument.