The article by Michael Maniates that we read for this week's blog assignment briefly comments on the idea that society as a whole views environmental degradation as a challenge that we can overcome with simple, individualist actions. Maniates challenges this view and instead asserts that we need to fundamentally alter our patterns of energy consumption in order to preserve the planet.

I enjoyed this article and thought that it brought up some important issues, noting that while simple "green" changes in daily life are a good thing, as a whole, people are too reliant on "easy" solutions and quick fixes for very large problems. There is definitely an individualistic attitude in society today which leads people to believe that they should only be responsible for themselves and their immediate family. It seems to me that if we will ever change the way that we use energy and consume products, we will first have to make a shift to think about environmental issues as collective problems which require collective solutions.

My main concern is that arguments like Maniates' are only heard by people who already agree with him. It is very easy to reject any sort of discussion that seeks to alter the lifestyle of a society and instead just continue on with the status quo. How can you get people to take action to preserve the environment if it is not easy or cost effective? Is it possible to convince an entire society to change the way that it lives in order to address environmental issues without the presence of tangible benefits? I'd like to think optimistically that it is possible...