20 March 2008
Why We Won’t Avert Our Ecological Suicide: I
Posted by Carleton Schade under: Economy; Overshoot; Wisdom .
The March 2, 2008 New York Times Op-Ed page was devoted to eight former presidential candidates from the two principle American parties, allowing each of them highly valued media space to describe an issue important to them that was not receiving its fair attention in the American dialogue. From left-leaning Kucinich, through the Democratic party spokespeople — Richardson, Biden, Dodd – to the representatives of the right – Thompson, Tancredo, Hunter and Brownback, all men, by the way, they thoughtfully wrote on any number of important issues that plague the American landscape—war in Afghanistan, the mortgage crisis and foreclosures, immigration policies, the crumbling infrastructure, the hallowing out of the country’s industrial base, and the rising divorce rate. Not one peep about the global environment, however. Not one word about global warming, extinction rates, water scarcity in America’s Southeast and Southwest, dead zones, three billion malnourished humans, the ethanol hoax…
And The Economist (March 15-21, 2008) notes in “The revolution that wasn’t” that despite European environmental taxes and discussions in England of raising carbon cuts from 60% to 80% by 2050, the actual benefits are nebulous and the governmental efforts likely to decline in the face of economic realities. Rising oil prices and inflation in England are having a chilling effect on environmental consciousness, at least at the level of power.
We cannot expect much more from our political leaders. They are in the awkward position of weighing the public good and the long-term interests of society with their own short-term interests. To keep their jobs, they face re-election every few years before a fickle electorate, and, if they didn’t know it before, all certainly understand now that of all the thousands of issues which any complex society must address, the most important is the economy. “It’s the Economy Stupid” still reverberates through the cultural mindspace. And a thriving economy of three hundred million within a larger global economy of billions, juiced up on fossil fuels and fed through the machinery of industrial agriculture is completely anathema to environmental sustainability.
Technological optimists and “can do” spirit aside, all environmental indicators have increasingly worsened when measured against time. There is little to yet suggest that we as a global community are prepared to scale down our lifestyles to the degree sufficient to even slow down the environmental degradation. Perhaps we are constitutionally incapable of transcending our animalian short-sightedness, or at least quickly enough to prevent our Ecological suicide. Since obviously we cannot voluntarily stop our destructive behaviors, the questions then become how long can life, the soil, water, oil, forests, oceans and air hold out, and with what forces will they compel our compliance?
2 Comments so far...
Global Warming Hoaxs is the new black » Quick Roundup Says:
20 March 2008 at 5:51 pm.
[…] http://diebackandcollapse.com/overshoot/why-we-won%E2%80%99t-avert-our-ecological-suicide-i/Not one peep about the global environment, however. Not one word about global warming, extinction rates, water scarcity in America’s Southeast and Southwest, dead zones, three billion malnourished humans, the ethanol hoax… … […]
Montreal Peter Says:
20 March 2008 at 6:28 pm.
More than forty years ago, Herbert Marcuse wrote the following:
We may distinguish both true and false needs. “False” are those which are superimposed upon the individual by particular social interests in his repression: the needs which perpetuate toil, aggressiveness, misery, and injustice. Their satisfaction might be most gratifying to the individual, but this happiness is not a condition which has to be maintained and protected if it serves to arrest the development of the ability (his own and others) to recognize the disease of the whole and grasp the chances of curing the disease. The result then is euphoria in unhappiness. Most of the prevailing needs to relax, to have fun, to behave and consume in accordance with the advertisements, to love and hate what others love and hate, belong to this category of false needs.
If what Marcuse says is truly the case, then there is no “agent for change” — the human mass needed to bring change about. The quality of life and human achievement are measured through the ability to consume. Alternative ways of structuring human experience are squeezed out by the culture of false needs and those who profit as the purveyors of these needs.