Saturday, April 17, 2004
Lori and Bruce -
The anti-immigration issue is nothing more than an abbreviation for the elitist criticism that has been leveled at environmentalists since someone first stopped to smell a flower. Problem is, it can be a fair criticism.
Preservationists are going to be suspect if they are the ones sitting on a chair when the music stops. In the struggle for existence, it's asking a bit much of someone to appreciate a sunset when it is their own son they are setting in the ground. Perhaps philanthropic dollars would be better spent on behalf of the environment if they were first given to those having trouble meeting their basic needs. We all want to act to stop the extermination of an irreplaceable resource, species or biome, but until we somehow learn to stem the tide of human suffering, anteing up for the environment is going to look like just another luxury to the many.
The irony is that we only seem to articulate the value of clean water once we have excelled at poisoning the well. And to those in the Third World, cleaning that well looks like one more case of the "have-nots" having to give more to the "haves". That's why any solution to environmental degradation has to be a socio-economic one. No one knowingly sets out to rape nature. It only happens as a bi-product of our drive toward "advancement". When the question becomes "who's advancement?", the environment is certain to come out on the short end of the stick.
The anti-immigration issue is nothing more than an abbreviation for the elitist criticism that has been leveled at environmentalists since someone first stopped to smell a flower. Problem is, it can be a fair criticism.
Preservationists are going to be suspect if they are the ones sitting on a chair when the music stops. In the struggle for existence, it's asking a bit much of someone to appreciate a sunset when it is their own son they are setting in the ground. Perhaps philanthropic dollars would be better spent on behalf of the environment if they were first given to those having trouble meeting their basic needs. We all want to act to stop the extermination of an irreplaceable resource, species or biome, but until we somehow learn to stem the tide of human suffering, anteing up for the environment is going to look like just another luxury to the many.
The irony is that we only seem to articulate the value of clean water once we have excelled at poisoning the well. And to those in the Third World, cleaning that well looks like one more case of the "have-nots" having to give more to the "haves". That's why any solution to environmental degradation has to be a socio-economic one. No one knowingly sets out to rape nature. It only happens as a bi-product of our drive toward "advancement". When the question becomes "who's advancement?", the environment is certain to come out on the short end of the stick.
