Grist threads in general have been infested by wingnuts for some years now, so I don’t think there’s much special going on with this one.

Brower’s case is interesting, and something I was not aware of.  It would be illuminating to compare what he said to what he is being reported to have said on some very, very far right websites (the one article that keeps getting repeated about him online appears at Immigration Watch Canada, which I believe has white nationalist links up here).

In any case, if extreme right groups are making a foray into the environmental forums, then that is worth keeping an eye out for.  It is not something I have noted much of in Canada, and I am fairly familiar with how that kind of politics works up here.  Further, there is nothing in the young lady’s comments that suggest such groups are having much of an impact down South of the 49th, but I am willing to be enlightened.  And you sound like you think a large part of the enviro base are in fact white nationalists, which I can assure you is not the case.

Finally, I still think the most interesting thing about that California group is V.D. Hanson’s membership.  By day he denies, by night he uses AGW to trash immigrants for a fringe right group.  Might be a story in that.

You’re not familiar with the environmentalist history on this topic, are you? You don’t know what Brower, Foreman, Abbey, et al have said? Check back for a post tomorrow, as I think it’ time we took a stroll down memory lane.

Meanwhile, go over to that Grist post and scan the comment thread. That should tell you something.

There is also the issue of: is this a real enviro group or some kind of right wing astroturf thingy.  I note that Victor David Hanson, who is usually going on about the global warming hoax and etc., is on the membership list.  That is suggestive.

But given your long-time role in the Sierra Club, I can understand why you feel the way you do.

First she implies that her personal experience of being raised as an environmentalist by immigrant parents is somehow representative.  Data to back that up?  Even if true, what does it say about her family’s environmental footprint relative to what it would have been had they remained in India?  

Then she blows it by making this ridiculous assertion:

“Second, most environmental protections are funded by tax dollars, and immigrants contribute a lot of those dollars.  The 14 percent of U.S. residents who are foreign-born and the additional U.S. citizens who live in mixed-status families foster environmental protection every day, by paying their taxes and contributing to economic growth that generates still more tax revenue.”

So, to paraphrase Hemingway, the rich are just like you and I, only they’re more green?

The fact is that more Americans, whether native-born or immigrant, equals excessive consumption.  Given that, I’m perfectly comfortable with people wanting to reduce immigration so long as they’re just as strongly in favor of reducing the native birth rate.

As for what Big Green groups are or aren’t saying on this subject, I would think that having recently spent time on the national staff of one of those organizations you’d be far better qualified than your readers to explain their views.