Let’s now delve into the confrontation of ecologism with the first ideology: liberalism. The discussion has five stages. The first situates the main coordinates of liberalism: market, rule of law and the representative government. The three components of liberalism are challenged by ecologism. On the legal front, the controversy crystallizes on the possibility of granting rights to nature and animals. Liberals then reproach ecologists for not respecting the rules of democracy: “direct action”, civil disobedience, “biodegradable” associations, etc. They should wisely run for elections, establish stable intermediary bodies like unions or hunters, and accept the result of the democratic game. And, above all, ecologists should stop trying to base their politics on a science, essentializing the social order. For ecologism, it is Luc Ferry who essentializes human nature, when he identifies the future of humanity with that of technology, echoing the discourse of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the University of Dakar in 2007. Liberalism is therefore not as neutral as it claims to be in relation to conceptions of good. The question of the economy remains. Ecologism is firmly anchored between two poles that escape the dominant alternative opposing state socialism and market liberalism, the plan and the market: a libertarian position, which advocates decentralized decision-making autonomy, and a centrism that supports neither extreme forms of statism nor the “all-market” liberalism. The key point is to promote ecological virtue over homo economicus. Seeing only the critique of the market, liberalism tends to consider ecologism as a disguised socialism—hence the metaphor of “watermelons”, green on the outside, red on the inside. The “return” of virtue also leads him to conclude that environmentalism wants to do away with modern individualism and “go back” to rehabilitate the “individual-in-the-community”. Hence the fantasy of hypothetical “green-red-browns”. For ecologism, this conception of good that liberals carry is that of accumulation. They fear the advent of an “ecofascism”, defined as the forceful imposition of a lifestyle that would always be modernist and industrialist. This poorly chosen term, as it has often been understood as designating an authoritarian form of ecologism, is inconsistent.