It must be in the air
Salon has published an article excerpted from a new book titled Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility, by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger; the piece argues that environmental alarmism has “had the opposite of [its] intended effect,”
provoking fatalism, conservatism, and survivalism among readers and the lay public, not the rational embrace of environmental policies.
Ya think?
Not to mention the out-and-out backlash — the ridicule (richly deserved much of the time) and “there you go crying wolf again” reaction every time we’re served yet another predication of environmental disaster.
The article makes quite a few other points I’ve raised myself for years. Here’s a taste:
The eco-tragedy narrative imagines humans as living in a fallen world where wildness no longer exists and a profound sadness pervades a dying Earth. The unstated aspiration is to return to a time when humans lived in harmony with their surroundings. That tragic narrative is tied to an apocalyptic vision of the future — an uncanny parallel to humankind’s Fall from Eden in the Book of Genesis and the end of the world in the final Book of Revelation.
Original sin, anyone?
For many environmentalists, Science is and should remain at the center of any politics aiming to overcome ecological crises. It is outside of history, society, and values. It is environmentalism’s touchstone, the central criterion on which the value of environmentalism should be judged. But to believe that the sciences were behind the passage of environmental laws is a faith — a scientism, not a science — one that overlooks the specific historical and social conditions that gave rise to the ecological values.
Amen!
Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal printed a piece by Stephen Moore last Friday that relates these findings from a new United Nations report called “State of the Future”:
* World-wide illiteracy rates have fallen by half since 1970 and now stand at an all-time low of 18%;
* More people live in free countries than ever before;
* The average human being today will live 50% longer in 2025 than one born in 1955;
* In 1981, 40% of the world’s population lived on less than $1 a day, while today that percentage is only 25%, adjusted for inflation;
* At current rates of growth, “world poverty will be cut in half between 2000 and 2015″;
* Trade and technology are closing the global “digital divide”.
Nordhaus and Shellenberger conclude their article by calling for a “new politics” which, they say
requires a new mood, one appropriate for the world we hope to create. It should be a mood of gratitude, joy, and pride, not sadness, fear, and regret. A politics of overcoming will trigger feelings of joy rather than sadness, control rather than fatalism, and gratitude rather than resentment.
Excellent idea. And isn’t it nice to know we don’t even have to fake it. We just have to learn to discount pronouncements from gloom and doomers as a matter of course ;-)
(Oh, and a little tax revolt to wake up our politicians might be nice for a quick change of pace!)
Technorati Tags: environmentalism