Optimism
The other week I had an interesting discussion with my sister about different types of environmentalists. Unbeknownst to me, I was a light green environmentalist, someone who believed that industry and nature could coexist if the proper steps were taken to ensure sustainability. A deep green environmentalist is someone who believes that the steps required to preserve our planet will forever be unpopular to the masses, so the industry and government will never take the large steps needed to prevent climate collapse.
Essentially, deep green environmentalists are proponents of ecoterrorism if that becomes the only viable way to save Earth. That’s a pretty pessimistic view but I can buy into it, because very few people enjoy imagining what their lifestyle is doing to our home. I certainly don’t, and I care about the environment. I want to be the optimist; I want someone else to come along and worry about these problems for me, to make our society function better.
The ideal candidate would be the government, but they are too focused on appeasing citizens, when we should realize, as a people, that the government needs to make the difficult decisions that we won’t want to as individuals.
Our entire society and community functions on optimism, or the belief that everything is going to be alright and safe. I walk down the street and I don’t fear violence. I trust that my belongings are protected in my apartment. Were I a pessimist, I would start hoarding canned goods and stock up on ammunition. I would cease to do my part for the society, and once enough people start to act like me then everything falls apart.
Of course the optimism and faith in society that prevents me from turning into a paranoid hermit, is based on the knowledge that there are people (aka the police and military) that protect us. Security is a pessimistic creation, they believe that a small part of society will break the societal conventions and must be stopped or punished.
At this point, I have to hope that our government or the government of other countries realize that they need to do the right thing even if it makes many of the short-sited, selfish, and greedy people living on this planet unhappy.
Nice summary of the issue. I too am a “light green” environmentalist, albeit a rather cynical one.
The double curse and boon of democracy is that the “government” that needs to make these long-game decisions is, ultimately, we the people. On the downside, that means the fate of the nation and perhaps the globe is in the hands of the masses who, if they’re living for the new iPad or greaseburger with a packaging half-life of a couple centuries, couldn’t care less.
On the upside, though, it provides opportunity for grassroots action. Effecting change in democracy is a long, hard process with little to show for its early stages. But if you persuade a few people, and they persuade a few more, there is at least the opportunity for that to turn into someting besides general disgruntlement at the king. It’s a long shot – there are a lot of people to persuade, and they aren’t that hard to buy off. It’s a lot of thankless work – if needed change happens, no one will notice the many people gently persuading their neighbors. It requires great care and patience – in order for the necessary avenues of conversation to remain open, that minds can be persuaded and change effected, we must be gentle and gracious in pointing out problems and necessary solutions. But it is a path of action to back up the hope. And I must believe it’s worth trying.
Otherwise I would go crazy.