Who gave our leaders the divine right to wreck the planet?

There is a belief held by much of conservative Christianity that to defend the natural environment from the planet’s greatest polluters, notably the fossil fuel industry, is inherently evil and against God’s will.

Many even credit the areas of bone-dry vegetation uncontrollably burning in California to some divine wrath upon that state’s collective liberal sinfulness (“What ignited the deadly California wildfires? Investigators consider an array of possibilities”, Friday 10 January).

In the early hours of 6 November, after his election win, Donald Trump stated: “Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason. And that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness.”

Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s former president, recklessly allowed the rainforest to be razed by both meat farmers and wildfires. During the summer of 2019, in the midst of yet another unprecedented wildfire, the evangelical Christian declared that his presidency was somehow divine: “I am fulfilling a mission from God.”

Another evangelical Christian, Canada’s former prime minister Stephen Harper, was unrelenting in his pro-fossil fuel war against science.

Perhaps there is a serious hazard in such theologically inclined people getting into high office.

Frank Sterle Jr

White Rock, Canada

Emboldened by success in the US presidential election, the Trump-Musk juggernaut has set its sights on making little old England an offshore theme park for the super-rich (“Reform MPs including Nigel Farage paid thousands by Elon Musk’s X for posting on site”, Friday 10 January).

The first step is to breed resentment and prejudicial attitudes by scapegoating minority groups and spreading lies and misinformation while offering simplistic answers to complex issues.

Nigel Farage, a man devoid of policy or principle, could yet find himself the conduit to the rise of autocratic government in Britain. He will, of course, be dispensed with in due course – but the danger he presents in the meanwhile is something against which we should guard ourselves.

Graham Powell

Cirencester, Gloucestershire

When we consider the perils faced by refugees (“UK plans to sanction people-smugglers in latest bid to stop perilous Channel crossings”, Wednesday 8 January), I think it important we also acknowledge that, as a country, we benefit from many of the underlying conflicts that cause people to seek safety here, via arms sales.

The House of Commons Library explains that, between 2018 and 2022, the UK won defence orders worth £25bn from the Middle East.

While we profit, many people lose everything – including their lives.

Recognising the profits we have been making from these conflicts, surely we should not begrudge the relatively small numbers of destitute people that make it to the UK the chance to find safety here – and the opportunity to further benefit the UK through their taxes?

Simon Milward

Stroud, Gloucestershire

A nation which has been unable to feed its populus for more than 200 years, despite devastating its natural environment in a failed attempt to do so, should not be exporting food (“Minister reveals alarming drop in British food exports to EU since Brexit”, Monday 6 January). Reducing our population and cutting our imports is what we should be doing.

Graham Cooper

Address supplied

When Mark Zuckerberg announced the end of fact-checking (“Zuckerberg’s ‘free speech’ pivot is nothing but a cynical power play”, Wednesday 8 January), he was wearing a Gruebel Forsey watch worth about $900,000.

Doesn’t Facebook have a clock function – or is it no longer reliable as no one is checking its accuracy?

Dennis Fitzgerald

Melbourne, Australia

To have a letter considered for publication, email your thoughts on topics covered in The Independent to letters@independent.co.uk. Please include your name, full address and contact phone number. Submissions may be edited for length and clarity