Culture > Environmentalism

The Liberal Call of the Wild

Civilization is superior to wilderness.

Jeffrey Folks | June 12, 2026

Occasionally, a video pops up on my screen of wild creatures fighting to the death: a lion and a hyena, an anaconda and a crocodile, and so on.  These videos prove that the natural world is not all peace and love.  Most wild creatures are either predators or prey, and there is nothing innocent or idyllic about life in the wild.

Granted, some humans are “predators,” too, but most of us are far more civilized than a mountain lion or an alligator.  Most humans have learned to respect others, obey the law, support and nurture their families through decades of growth, love their country, and worship God.  This is the meaning of civilization, and it is an enormous step above what happens in the wild.

Radical environmentalists teach that wilderness is superior to human civilization. In fact, one of the guiding tenets of environmentalism is the quasi-religious belief that wilderness takes precedence over human civilization.  From an environmental point of view, it is human populations that should be reduced in number, whether by forced sterilization, euthanasia, or other means, and wild animals that should be protected at all cost.

One can see the effects of this belief in the liberal opposition to growth.  When a new subdivision goes up, environmentalists bemoan the loss of “habitat,” as if humans don’t need a habitat as well.  When an obscure species is threatened — or not even an established species, but a questionable sub-species — environmentalists sue to place vast regions off limits to development, especially to fossil fuel development.  If it’s a choice between water for agriculture that........

© American Thinker