Native American drummers lead the Native Nations March in Denver, Colorado on March 10, 2017.Native tribes from around the US gathered for four days of protest against the administration of US President Donald Trump and the Dakota Access oil pipeline. In the first week of his presidency, Donald Trump signed executive orders to revive the Dakota Access project, along with a second pipeline put on hold by the Obama administration, Keystone XL. / AFP PHOTO / Jason Connolly (Photo credit should read JASON CONNOLLY/AFP/Getty Images)

Ideology is good as a source, but bad as a strait-jacket.  Ideology, by definition, does not respond to specific conditions and as a result, in the real world, occasionally falls down, especially given the inability of rigid theory to cope with human behavior.  Free markets make lots of sense (especially compared to government controlled markets), but people do not always act in their own economic best interests.  Racial discrimination in the South, for example, was a major drag on the region’s development and refusing customers of a different race (or nationality, religion etc.) was obviously bad business, but that didn’t stop massive numbers of people and establishments from practicing it.
That said, there is clearly an enormous amount of ideology in supposedly rational policy-making, in part those who adopt absolutist stands based on an ideology, but probably more often when decision-makers and the public inform themselves according to pre-set beliefs.  As numerous authors have made clear, opinions tend to be formed prior to acquiring evidence, and then evidence is sifted to support those opinions.  Classic case:  the TV Bigfoot hunter who, in the woods at night, hears a rustling sound and cries, “It’s Bigfoot!”  (It wasn’t Bigfoot.)
The problem is that all too many have opinions that are clearly wrong but to which they cling.   Many are aware of the controversy over vaccination and whether it causes autism, as well as the belief that so-called genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are dangerous.  These fallacies are only one step up from a belief in alien abductions, crystal power, and yes, Bigfoot, because while they might begin with some rational concerns, the believers then reject all evidence that contradicts their opinions. 
But there are a number of more mundane issues (meaning not sexy enough to make the History Channel) where beliefs are formed not on the basis of information but people’s underlying beliefs and attitudes.  Nuclear power is an excellent example:  there are reasons for safety regulations, but Germany’s closure of its nuclear plants because of the Fukushima accident, due to a one-in-a-thousand year tsunami off Japan, certainly falls into this category.  The increased use of lignite which resulted is much worse for the environment on pretty much every count, especially given the astronomically small odds of a ten-meter tsunami in Germany.
More recently, opponents of hydraulic fracturing of shale (but not conventional oil wells) have focused on anecdotal reports (my well is contaminated), ‘research’ showing a vague correlation between fracking and various health problems (people living near fracking wells drive big trucks), and a conspiratorial view of the state of knowledge (the EPA has sold out to industry).  Aside from the apocalyptic nature of the views (the Delaware River Valley has been destroyed—David Letterman), the ignorance shown by so many commentators should, one would think, disqualify them from providing inpu
ts to policy decisions (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons result from burning oil, gas, coal, wood, garbage, and tobacco, so it’s not surprising to find it near fracking sites—or anywhere else.)
But now the next big thing for environmental protesters is:  the pipeline industry.  As one said, “we plan to use Keystone as a launching point to change a lot of hearts and minds and to fight multiple other projects at once” Because, um, well it’s complicated.  There are land use issues, as some residents object to having pipelines cross their lands, and social justice (don’t ask), but primarily the idea that preventing the transport of oil and gas by pipeline will harm the environment either locally or by increasing greenhouse gas emissions.
The latter concern is relatively silly.  Pipelines are the most efficient way to transport natural gas by far, and somewhat more efficient than rail transport for oil.  Not building any given pipeline will have little or no impact on either the production or consumption of fossil fuels, which should be environmentalists’ target.  The Dakota Access pipeline controversy is symptomatic:  the oil now travels by train, and crosses the Missouri River already. 
But any number of opponents are ready to express their terror at the damage that building a pipeline would do to their quality of life.  Specifics are relatively hard to come by, and rarely documented, but amount to little more than a Luddite ideology:  modernism is bad.  People with spare time on their hands suddenly notice that there is industrial activity going on, and oppose it.  In many ways, this is reminiscent of the late 19th century diagnosis of “neurasthenia,” a nervous condition caused by the rapid technological and societal changes occurring. 
The irrational nature of this opposition is supported by raw numbers:  there are 1.7 million miles of oil and gas pipelines in the United States (2014 data ) which have led to the occasional spill or accident, but nothing out of the ordinary in modern society.  Yet almost without exception, the media has rarely discussed the impact of the existing pipeline network except to note statistics about spills and accidents.  NPR and Inside Energy’s Amy Sisk was a rare exception, talking to Fort Berthold reservation members about the effects, good and bad, of oil and pipelines on their lives. 
The truth is:  the universe is trying to kill you.  Okay, that’s too general.  There are many threats to your health and well-being (or quality of life) from modern society, most of which are being ignored by those protesting the supposed existential threat of oil and gas pipelines.  At the risk of reinforcing the perception of me (one of my brothers has already photo-shopped me as a demon), I have to side with Mephistopheles in Faust, who said, “That’s how the well-trained mind is known to me…What you don’t reckon, you think can’t be true.”  If your ignorance is the source of your position, you need to reconsider.