FYI...Stefanie
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mark Dowie. _Losing Ground: American Environmentalism at the Close of
the Twentieth Century_. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1996. Notes and
index. $ 27.50 (cloth), ISBN 0-262-04147-2; $12.50 (paper), ISBN
0-262-54084-3.
Reviewed by Jodi Allison-Bunnell, The University of Montana, for H-ASEH
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What is the state of the environmental movement at the end of the
twentieth century?
The movement is without question tremendously popular; more than 80 per
cent of Americans describe themselves as environmentalists. Yet we now
have an anti-environmental Congress that says, "Economy first, ecology
later," and those self-described "environmentalists" are buying
gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles more than ever before--thanks to low
gas prices and a legislative unwillingness to force automakers to
improve fuel economy.
In _Losing Ground_, Dowie argues that the environmental movement is
"courting irrelevance"; unable to meet its stated goals, it lost ground
during the conservative and corporate 1980s and can now choose to evolve
or die. It is a "respectable, safe, and polite" movement (p. 3), more
consumed with expensive litigation and direct-mail marketing than with
grassroots action. The _modus operandi_ has become compromise, not the
tougher stance that, Dowie argues, is essential. Mainstream
environmental organizations garnered millions of dollars of
contributions in the 1980s, but now have falling memberships. The size
and wealth of environmental organizations have helped some causes,
despite a rather narrow environmental agenda that favors furry mammals
and clean air for backpackers over non-white humans and clean air in the
workplace.
Dowie begins with the historical antecedents of the environmental
movement in America, arguing that the movement is based in the
"environmental imagination" of a harmonious and pristine environment. He
cites influences from the Bible to Henry David Thoreau to Gifford
Pinchot and John Muir and Aldo Leopold. Environmentalism rose as an
ex-urban phenomenon out of
aesthetic influences and early promotion of scenic values, primarily by
the privileged white protecting their scenic treasures like the Yosemite
Valley and the majestic forests. He cites Robert Gottlieb's _Forcing the
Spring_ (1993), which shows how the environmental movement shied away
from urban issues even though they developed as Progressive issues.
Most of the book focuses on the movement after 1970. By the 1970s,
environmentalism was a robust and popular movement. In keeping with its
polite, middle-class, legacy, it moved into an agenda that focused on
litigation and legislation. This was effective for a time; it did
establish the rights of nature, flora, and fauna and their standing that
entitled them to similar protections as corporations. Environmental
organizations assumed that they would file lawsuits against violating
industries and be backed by U. S. law.
Instead, they found themselves suing the government to enforce and abide
by its own laws. In addition, litigate-legislate strategy requires
enormous amounts of money to support its hired experts, direct-mail
marketing and corporate structure. In addition, seven per cent of
environmental organizations' support comes from foundation
philanthropy--which depends, in turn, on not offending any key personnel
in that organization. Those foundations depend on large
corporations--and often have leaders from polluting industries on their
boards of directors. This mix, Dowie contends, is a sign of the constant
compromises that environmental
organizations make.
Compromise, Dowie asserts, is the worst strategy for environmentalists.
Meeting violators half-way only produces half-results:
"[environmentalists] will only gain results if one party is willing to
do something more drastic than cut a deal" (p. 77). The civil rights
movement, he contends, was won not by laws, but by direct, non-violent
confrontation.
Environmentalism has also bred strong antagonists that fight against any
perceived attack on the sacred American institution of private property,
and environmentalists have been blamed for nearly all U. S. social
problems. The "wise use" movement, which terms environmentalists "nature
fascists" and draws support from RV clubs, the right wing, and the
natural resource industry. Creation of adversaries is a sign of health,
but environmentalists have failed to confront their challengers
directly.
Dowie paints a gloomy picture of environmentalism's failures, but also
offers much hope for reform and a brighter future. Environmentalism must
embrace the ideal of environmental justice. "In a nation built on
notions of equal opportunity and equal rights, the environmental
imagination must include the premise that the environment belongs to us
all; that we share equally its life-sustaining attributes and whatever
degradation we impose upon it" (p. 125). Environmentalists must move
their concerns beyond nests for bluebirds and protection for whales to
homes for people and jobs for the unemployed--the loss of both animal
and human habitat. The picture must include not only wilderness, but
"the place you live, the place you work, the place you play" (p. 174).
Focus on human habitat needs to go beyond the habitats of the white and
middle-class. Without this broader focus, environmentalism is but half
a movement.
The hopeful future is in the "fourth wave" of environmentalism, that
includes deep ecology, social ecology, feminist ecology, bioregionalism,
spiritual ecology, and native ecology, with room for input from radical
groups like Earth First!. It must be a multiracial, multiclass,
multicultural effort with input from many corners. It will include a
roster of new players like the Greens, true Democrats, human rights
advocates, ecological economists, and madeover mainstreamers. Dowie is
optimistic--and presents predictions based on some well-known current
trends.
Once again, Dowie cites the importance of the "environmental
imagination" to make these changes. Yet his initial examination of that
imagination is perhaps the least satisfactory portion of the book. It
seems essential to "imagination" to examine more of the output of that
imagination--including literature and art. The work could benefit from
more focus on the burgeoning field of environmental literature and some
of the critiques it has produced of both classic and less well-known
writers. Additionally,
the narrative jumps fairly abruptly from Progressivism to Rachel Carson,
largely skipping important changes in American culture that might
complement his argument.
Although Dowie is a journalist and not an academic historian, I was
somewhat frustrated by his endnotes, which cite most--but not all--of
the works he mentions. This impedes anyone attempting to trace his
sources.
Dowie has produced a compelling and important work that will be of
interest to those interested in contemporary environmentalism,
economics, public policy, natural resources, and social movements. This
is environmental history in its most classic sense--a history and
critique of the movement itself--and has important messages for that
movement and beyond. Although Dowie's solutions are radical,
particularly his endorsement of Earth First!s tactics, his focus on
local, grassroots solutions is well-taken.
Jodi Allison-Bunnell
The University of Montana
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Copyright (c) 1997 by H-Net, all rights reserved. This work may be
copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit is given to the
author and the list. For other permission, please contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
************************************
Dr. Stefanie S. Rixecker
Department of Resource Management
Lincoln University, Canterbury
PO Box 56
Aotearoa New Zealand
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fax: 64-03-325-3841
************************************
