Misplaced Pages

Anti-nuclear movement: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:47, 25 October 2005 editEd Poor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,195 edits Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament← Previous edit Revision as of 22:01, 25 October 2005 edit undoPurplefeltangel (talk | contribs)2,098 editsm Stub-sorting. You can help!Next edit →
Line 10: Line 10:
*] *]


{{stub}} {{activism-stub}}

]]

Revision as of 22:01, 25 October 2005

The anti-nuclear movement holds that nuclear power is inherently dangerous and thus ought to be "replaced with safe and affordable renewable energy."

Some observers claimed to see a considerable overlap between opponents of nuclear power and supporters of unilateral disarmament during the Cold War. Others link the anti-nuclear movement to currents within the environmentalist movement who want the West (particularly the U.S.) to stop using so much energy and get back to simpler things.

Critics of unilatireal disarmament felt that the practice would not have the heralded effect but would encourage Soviet aggression (abroad) and facilitate repression internally.

Critics of the "back to nature" element among environmentalists often feel that it's either (a) misguided earth worship which puts people second and nature first or (b) a trick by redistributionist socialists to get the U.S. to transfer 100s of billions of dollars of wealth annually to third world governments.

See:

Stub icon

This activism-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: