In the face of recent rhetoric about an alleged mandate, it's clear the challenge is greater than ever. But the important thing is that the fundamental politics of the environment did not change with this election.But this gets things backwards. The "important thing" is not that despite Bush's election, people still support green positions. The important thing is that despite people's support of green positions, Bush got re-elected.
Broad support for environmentalism should not be blithely considered good news for enviros. We are losing -- losing elections and losing momentum. That we are doing so despite public support for the substance of our agenda is an indictment, not an indication that the losing is some sort of incidental challenge.
Winning is not everything, as Vince Lombardi once said. It's the only thing.
Comments
View as Flat
jdhlax Posted 6:44 am
13 Jan 2005
First, the vast majority of people who claim to be environmentalists are not. They just think that animals are cute or that nature is aesthetically pleasing. Those with this view will give no priority to environmental issues.
Second, the vast majority of people also think that money and material things are more important than life, especially non-human life, and that humans are better and/or more important than plants, other animals, land, air, and water.
What we need to do is to find a way to get those people to mentally and spiritually evolve to reverse those views. If a significant number of them did so, candidates with strong environmental positions or records would not be losing elections, nor would candidates with environmentally destructive positions or records be winning them.
Human evolution is not having more advanced environmentally destructive technology. One of the original Star Trek episodes had it right: evolution is about evolving mentally and spiritually, experiencing as much as possible in life while doing no harm to other people or other forms of life (including the land, air, and water). A truly evolved people would have no technology and would barely be noticeable. This is what we must strive for, and if we get enough people to do so we will not continue to lose.
Permalink
McGee Posted 3:36 pm
14 Jan 2005
I was raised catholic, so that what I base my arguement on. We were taught that the earth is ours. Whatever we need we take. If we don't need an animal or plant species that maybe it should go extinct.
This way of thinking makes my stomach turn. What if evolution isn't about us? What if we are just a stepping stone in this planets history? Another ice age comes and another intelligent species evolves.
I believe in technology, it is all we have. The application of science. For people in our society to give up creature comforts is not going to happen (even I admit I don't know if I could do it).
But I do agree a change to the basic mindset would really help...
Permalink
SMLowry Posted 5:44 am
15 Jan 2005
I don't believe evolution is about us, or only us anyway. Evolution is about evolution and every thing and every one on every level (physical, mental, spiritual) is caught up in it. I recommend reading anything by Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme, David Abram.
Susan
Permalink