Why did conservatives cede environmentalism and conservation to liberals? You’d think “conserving nature” would be a natural conservative position but no. Conservatives want to pave over every acre, log every old growth forest and drill in every wildlife reserve across the country, all in the name of corporate profits and shareholder value. What gives?

>>513683366 (OP)
>we would've cut down every single redwood tree in california
Don't flatter yourself, redwood isn't even useful for toilet paper.

>>513683704
Yes it is, you’re thinking of sequoias. Redwood is farmed on plantations.

>>513683366 (OP)
Because conservatives are retarded and uninformed. Most conservatives and MAGAs on this board are blissfully unaware that the politicians they support actively wish to exploit nature for profit as much as possible. Hell, most of them are even convinced that their side is the pro-environment side. This is because, of course, conservatives generally are pro-environment but have to perform mental gymnastics to avoid contradicting their own values in supporting their politicians.

>>513683366 (OP)
>What gives?
Because conservatism is about corporate profits and shareholder value above all else.

>>513685247
It's called thinking things through. Meanwhile on the left:
>reeee poor trees logging le bad
>I just took a shit now to wipe my ass with this magical white stuff that comes from nowhere

>>513686649
Because indiscriminately destroying natural resources for immediate profit without any plan for long-term sustainability is "thinking things through" kill yourself dude

>>513685247
>because conservatives are retarded and uninformed
Stopped reading here. This is pretty much the only explanation needed.

>>513686649
Nobody is against sustainably farming trees. We’ve been doing it for centuries.
The problem is that conservatives are retarded and want to log protected old growth for some fucking reason even though we already export >50% of our lumber production.

>>513688579
>(((some fucking))) reason