What it Means to be Green
by Robert Russo
Much of the domestic news and snippets this month have been devoted to "going green", how the nations of Europe are far ahead of us in environmental responsibility, and climate change is being prioritized across the board by the UN, networks and even Walmart. To anyone who truly feels environmental responsibility this is merely going "less than brown". People who care about something don't wait until the last minute when its decay affects their very welfare forcing them to take notice.
Carbon Monitoring for Action has a map of the world's biggest sources of CO2 emissions that seems to show industrial disparity. In the evolution of world power the technological advances that set apart the superpowers repeat themselves a generation or two later to divide the lesser nations (i.e. China's race for the moon, Pakistan and India acquiring the A-bomb etc.). China is by far the leading CO2 producer with South Africa and India on their way to eclipsing the United States and Europe.* In contrast, Germany (whose Black Forest was almost decimated by acid rain) has a lot of green zones, which brings up cultural disparity. It's a map of national priorities. (Although this should be taken with a grain of salt given the globalization of industry. American companies may very well be outsourcing these factories to places where the native people do care about the environment but have no choice.)
The last thing the Earth needs is a masquerade of environmental awareness. Anyone who has seen a Walmart supercenter and its surrounding area knows it is a dead zone and source of innumerable waste for as long as it stays in business. How can they claim to amend their ways when their goal is to build more stores? CNN however reports that this scant promise "was enough to encourage some environmental groups to say that the world's largest retailer is trying".** Almost every human project whether metropolitan or rural rapes the environment from business mergers to landscaping. It's just not a priority in our lives except in recreation. In the early 90's this was considered the most upstanding global issue, then as the subject of implementation was raised it was dismissed as bunk (some would say because Bush was elected instead of Gore). For this reason news agencies flooded with reports of climate change around the globe always maintain doubt ("America's heat wave is record-breaking and dangerous, but is it global warming?")*** as if it doesn't speak for itself, to avoid holding the naysayers responsible and the industrial achievements we have to thank for this. Perhaps the ultimate newsline will be "It's everything they said it would be, it's just not global warming because there's no such thing.". Imagine a campaign to actually reverse habitat destruction or shut down chemical plants in the Richmond area and the tailspin it would send our society into. If the Governor stopped just one real estate development the outrage might end his political future to ensure it can't happen again.
Tips on living a greener lifestyle are everywhere and will continue to grow in popularity, but this merely fits the environment into a corner of people's existing paradigm. What we need is a new paradigm. Here are some tips on making a real difference instead of taking a step forward for every three steps backward:
1. Appreciate nature as something that belongs here while we are mere interlopers. Like it the way it is, take offense when it is destroyed. Whatever grows on your land is your responsibility to protect. If you enjoy running in the park, set aside a park of your own.
2. Prioritize your home life. Business and profit affect people's lives, particularly development. Even the profiteers go home at the end of the day and have their cares and concerns represented as residents. Don’t let your personal life and dreams be hidden or buried by what you do to make money. It is when we separate ourselves from our natural environment that we start thinking it's something we don't need. If you don't like the increasing congestion on your daily commute or the shopping mall where the view from your house used to be, let it reflect through your business decisions. Don't pretend that one has nothing to do with the other. (Admittedly this is easier for some people than others, but the purpose of working is to protect your interests. Your neighborhood is one of those interests.)
3. Don't be fooled by "hobby" environmentalism. Gardening and yard work are not "getting back to nature", popular landscaping hurts the environment. Spending time outdoors does not by itself do much good if those activities can be done elsewhere. Don't be satisfied by what passes for environmental awareness in corporations. Every one of them has done more harm than good.
Energy-saving habits such as recycling and carpooling are still a good idea, until you look up at the chemical plumes in Hopewell or strip-mining on your way to the recycling bin and wonder how infinitestimal these measures are. This awareness means facing the powerful industries of real estate and manufacturing. There really is no way to turn the tide without it. The latest tips on being eco-friendly are at http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/10/19/pip.greentips/index.html.
*http://carma.org/
**http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/11/16/walmart.green.report.ap/index.html
***www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14155846/
Question of the Week: If there were no other considerations, what is the most straightforward thing you could do to help the environment or prevent its destruction? Say no to a land deal? Restore your back yard to its natural state? Boycott a major polluter? Refuse to sell chemically-made products? How close do you think this sentiment is to reality? Send your opinions to russo@richmondliberty.org.
If you have topics of interest to libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!