Roger Scruton had this idea “oikophobia” as a counterpart to “racism”, the idea being that the left is phobic as regards the home “the oikos”—the oiks, the plebs. It would never work because the right can’t deploy rhetoric; it doesn’t work by mockery, passive-aggressive provocation, and double-binds—that’s how women work. Here is what the right really has: ecology—ecology, just like “economy”, also derives from “oikos”. The home, the economy, the land, the folk (the oiks)—it all comes from the same root. Nature is the House of Being—Heidegger said that; or something like that, anyway.
We don’t have ecology anymore—we have the environment. If you look back at the early Green movement there was always a crisis moment where some bearded individuals with an interest in “game control” split from the lefties (or the lefties split from them) and formed an outfit called “the Ecology Party” or similar. To be “a Green”, to be an environmentalist, is to be a leftist—to be an ecologist is probably the most right-wing position you can have. You’re interested in holism, the organism—the language of the birds…
The change to environmentalism from ecology (not an -ism; it’s an -ology, it’s a word-law) marks a leftist incursion and subversion—an attack on people who knew the earth has limits, that the “game” needs to be controlled on this estate, and who perhaps saw how the very 1970s field of cybernetics related to nature (ecology is a 1970s thing). So, at base, the right is ecological—nature herself is rather silent, and so is the right; she has very complex patterns and if you’re silent and humble you will see and hear them—if you just seek your own interests you never will, especially if you babble on; and, in time, you will be punished. You will punish yourself—nature is like judo or bamboo, you push all your energy into it and, somehow, it comes back at you twice as strong.