Rachel's Environment & Health News #766
April 3, 2003 (Published June 25, 2003)
Environmental Research Foundation
http://www.rachel.org

Walking North On A Southbound Train, Pt. 1

by David W. Orr**

An old farmer once told me a story of a wily fox that he came to know 
well, and its interactions with his unfortunate dog. One day, as he 
tells it, the fox began to run in circles just outside the radius of 
the dog's tether, followed by the frantically barking dog. After a 
few laps the tether was wrapped around the post, at which point the 
fox strutted in to devour the dog's food while the helpless mutt 
looked on. Something like that has happened to all of us who believe 
that nature and ecosystems are worth preserving and that this is a 
matter of obligation, spirit, true economy, and common sense. Someone 
or something has run us in circles, tied us up, and is eating our 
lunch. It is time to ask who and why and how we might respond. Here 
is what we know:

(1) Despite occasional success, overall we are losing the epic 
struggle to preserve the habitability of the earth. The overwhelming 
fact is that virtually all important ecological indicators are in 
decline. The human population increased three-fold in the twentieth 
century and will likely grow further before leveling off at 8-11 
billion. The loss of species continues and will likely increase in 
coming decades. Human-driven climatic change is occurring more 
rapidly than many scientists thought possible even a few years ago. 
There is no political or economic movement presently underway 
sufficient to stop the process short of a doubling or tripling of the 
background rate of 280 ppm CO2. On the horizon are other threats in 
the form of self-replicating technologies that may place humankind 
and natural systems in even greater jeopardy.

(2) The forces of denial in the United States are more militant and 
brazen than ever. Every day millions in this country alone hear that 
those concerned about the environment are "extremists," "wackos," or 
worse. A former Wyoming senator charges that the environmental 
movement is "a front for these terrorists," and no significant 
Washington politician utters any objection.[1] And people holding 
such opinions have been appointed to strategic positions throughout 
the federal government.

(3) The movement to preserve a habitable planet is caught in the 
crossfire between fundamentalists of the corporate-dominated global 
economy and those of atavistic religious movements. It is far easier 
to see the latter than the former, but in a longer perspective the 
forces of perpetual economic expansion will be perceived to be at 
least as dangerous as those of a purely religious sort. That danger 
is now magnified by a new rightwing doctrine gaining the status of 
national policy that permits the United States to strike preemptively 
at any country deemed to be an enemy without resort to international 
law, morality, common sense, or public debate. In the words of one 
analyst, this is "a strategy to use American military force to permit 
the continued offloading onto the rest of the world of the ecological 
costs of the existing U.S. economy -- without any short-term 
sacrifices on the part of U.S. capitalism, the U.S. political elite 
or U.S. voters".[2]

(4) Fundamentalists either economic or religious require dependably 
loathsome enemies. For Osama bin Laden, the United States and George 
W. Bush admirably serve that purpose. It is no less true that the 
foundering presidency of Mr. Bush was revitalized by the activities 
of Mr. Bin Laden and subsequently by the less agreeable attributes of 
Saddam Hussein. Each is fulfilled and defined by an utterly vile 
enemy.

(5) There has been a steep erosion of democracy and civil liberties 
in the United States, driven by what former president Jimmy Carter 
describes as "a core group of conservatives who are trying to realize 
long-pent-up ambitions under the cover of the proclaimed war against 
terrorism."[3] There is a strong antidemocratic movement on the right 
wing of American politics that would limit voting rights, reduce 
access to information, prevent full disclosure of the conduct of 
public business, and reduce public control of military affairs.

(6) In the 1990s, massive amounts of wealth were transferred from the 
poor and middle classes to the richest. By one estimate "the 
financial wealth of the top 1% exceeds the combined household 
financial wealth of the bottom 95%."[4] Much of this transfer of 
wealth was simply theft. In the California energy "crisis" alone, an 
estimated $30 billion was diverted by those utilities that 
effectively defrauded the state and its citizens.

(7) For nearly a quarter century, government at all levels has been 
under constant attack by the extreme right wing, with the clear 
intention of eroding our capacity to forge collective solutions. The 
assumption is now common that markets are "moral" but that publicly 
created political solutions are not. The result is a continuation of 
what a Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, once described as "a 
riot of individualistic materialism, under which complete freedom for 
the individual... turned out in practice to mean perfect freedom for 
the strong to wrong the weak" (quoted by C. Meine, unpublished 
manuscript).

(8) The U.S. government's strategy, once revealed by Ronald Reagan's 
director of the Office of the Budget, David Stockman, has been to cut 
taxes for corporations and the wealthy and increase military 
spending, there by creating a severe fiscal crisis that requires 
cutting expenditures for health, education, mass transit, the 
environment, and cities.

(9) Our problems are systemic in nature and will have to be solved at 
the system level.

(10) There are yet good possibilities for averting the worst of what 
may lie ahead.

In short, the movement to preserve the habitability of the earth is 
failing, and we ought to ask why. The reasons can be found neither in 
the lack of effort or good intention by thousands of scientists, 
activists, and concerned citizens nor in a lack of information, data, 
logic, and scientific evidence. On these counts the movement has 
grown impressively, as has the quality and quantity of scientific 
evidence and rational discourse on which it rests. But we must look 
more deeply at how this movement is manifest in the larger arena in 
which public attitudes are formed and the way in which it influences 
the conduct of the public business.

We are failing, first, because for 20 years or longer we have tried 
to be reasonable on the terms of the opposition, in the belief that 
we could persuade the powerful if we only offered enough reason, 
data, evidence, and logic. We have quantified the decline of species, 
ecosystems, and now planetary systems in exhaustive detail. We bent 
over backward to accommodate the style and intellectual predilections 
of self-described "conservatives" and those for whom the economy is 
far more important than the environment, in the belief that 
politeness and good evidence stated in their terms would win the day. 
Accordingly, we put the case for the earth and coming generations in 
the language of economics, science, and law. With remarkably few 
exceptions we have been reasonable, erudite, clever, cautiously 
informative, and -- relative to the magnitude of the challenges 
before us -- ineffective. In short, we do science, write books, 
publish articles, develop professional societies, attend conferences, 
and converse learnedly. But they do politics, take over the 
courts,[5] control the media, and manipulate the fears and 
resentments endemic to a rapidly changing society.

The movement to preserve a habitable Earth is failing, too, because 
it is fractured into different factions, groups, and arcane 
philosophies. In this respect it has come to resemble the nineteenth 
century European socialist movement, which became bitterly divided 
into warring factions, each more eager to be right than right and 
effective. When the world was finally ready for better ideas about 
how to decently organize industrial society, that movement delivered 
Bolshevism, and the rest, as they say, is history. The left 
historically has exhausted itself in bloody internecine quarrels, the 
strategy, as David Brower once described it, of drawing the wagons 
into a circle and shooting inward. The right generally suffers no 
such fracturing, in large part because their agenda is formed around 
less complicated aims having to do with pecuniary advantage.

Further, I think Jack Turner is right in saying that we are failing 
because all too often we are complacent and lack passion. "We are," 
in his words, "a nation of environmental cowards... willing to accept 
substitutes, imitations, semblances, and fakes -- a diminished wild. 
We accept abstract information in place of personal experience and 
communication."[6] Effective protest, he continues, "is grounded in 
anger and we are not (consciously) angry. Anger nourishes hope and 
fuels rebellion, it presumes a judgment, presumes how things ought to 
be and aren't, presumes a caring. Emotion remains the best evidence 
of belief and value. Unfortunately, there is little connection 
between our emotions and the wild" (pgs. 21-22). We are endlessly 
busy trading email, doing research, writing papers, and attending 
conferences in exotic places, but we go into the wild less and less 
often. We are cut off from the source.

Finally, we are losing because we have failed to appreciate the depth 
of human needs for transcendence and belonging. We have allowed those 
intending to pillage the last of nature to do so behind the cover of 
religion, national pride, community, and family. As a result, the 
majority of U.S. citizens -- even those who regard themselves as 
"environmentalists" -- see little problem with the goals of human 
domination of nature and the perpetual expansion of the human estate 
on Earth. As Buddhists would have it, whatever we thought we were 
doing, we have built a system based on illusion, greed, and ill will 
disguised by patriotism, religious doctrine, and individualism.

[Continued next issue: What is to be done?]

==========

* Reprinted from Conservation Biology Volume 17, No. 2, April 2003, 
pgs. 348-351. The title comes from Peter Montague, Rachel's 
Environment and Health News #570 (October 30, 1997) available at 
www.rachel.org.

** David W. Orr is chairperson of the Environmental Studies Program 
at Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH 44074, U.S.A.; E-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[1] Walkom, T. 2002. Return of the old, Cold War. The Toronto Star, 
28 September: F-1, F-4.

[2] Lieven, A. 2002. The push for war. London Review of Books 4(19).

[3] Carter, J. 2002. The troubling new face of America. Washington 
Post, 5 September.

[4] Gates, J. 2002. Globalization's challenge. Reflections 3(4).

[5] Buccino, S. et al. 2001. Hostile environment: how activist judges 
threaten our air, water, and land. Natural Resources Defense Council, 
Washington, D.C.

[6] Turner, J. 1996. The abstract wild. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.


NOTICE
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is 
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior 
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. Some 
of this material may be copyrighted by others. We believe we are 
making "fair use" of the material under Title 17, but if you choose 
to use it for your own purposes, you will need to consider "fair use" 
in your own case and perhaps seek reprint permission from the 
copyright owner. Environmental Research Foundation provides this 
electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS free of 
charge even though it costs the organization considerable time and 
money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this 
service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution 
(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your 
tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, 
P.O. Box 160, New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0160. Please do not send credit 
card information via E-mail. For further information about making 
tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F. by credit card please phone us 
toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at (732) 828-9995, or fax us at (732) 
791-4603.
--Peter Montague, Editor

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


Reply via email to