Maniate's Should-be Mandates

Professor Maniates' argument--surprisingly enough-- is one of the first of it's kind as far as my environmental studies have taken me. Reminiscent of ancient Greece, where Plato's society dichotomized philosophers--great minds-- from the rest of the general population, environmentalist often treat the public as children. Just as Plato's society stressed great intellect stemming from debates between these great minds, environmentalists hold no punches with each other, yet often do little more than placate the public by allowing them to pat themselves on the back for, frankly, minuscule tasks. Some environmentalists are so extreme that they limit those who can be dubbed true environmentalists to those who have foregone the act of having children. Why, then, is the public babied? Can a society trusted to determine the fate of criminals on death row; to classify what stage a fetus must achieve before it can be considered a baby, really not be trusted to seriously contribute to saving our planet? Have we really lost so much faith in ourselves as a society that the fear of deterring the public from environmental action leads us to all but lie to them? Indeed, Maniates efficiently highlights our inexplicable glorification of easy; a glorification that we simply can longer afford.

As dire a concern as the environment is, little more than the bare minimum is being asked of us. Socially, "going green" has even become trendy, cute, a bragging right. We are rewarding what should be habit, and ignoring the fundamental change that Maniates so necessarily calls for. The mainstream environmental movement encourages unanimously doing our small part to achieve a greater affect. If the goal was unity, or something less pressing, this idea would be more understandable. However, the immediate and colossal change our planet's condition calls for leaves no room to sugar-coat; to pat our nation on the back for their minute but heartfelt efforts. In fact, I would argue that we are doing more harm than good. As Maniate's highlights in his examples of Martin Luther King, Paul Revere, Franklin Roosevelt, our nation often acts most efficiently and unitedly in the face of extreme conditions. Herein lies the disheartening conundrum. The environment is as extreme a condition as any, yet by calling for minor actions we paint it as a low priority, something we can do at the end of our day-- if we have time.

Fortunately, Maniates urges more than marginal tweaking. He highlights what should be public knowledge: the dire threat we face calls for dire and fundamental changes: in our energy, transportation and agricultural systems. Real change means casting aside this unwarranted fear of discussing the issues at hand. It means taking the public out of their comfort zones; scaring them into action if need be. If our treatment thus far can parallel that of children, the time has finally come for our unavoidable time-out. The most striking part of Maniates argument was how pertinent it was to my own life. Hardly the environmentalist, the characteristics of our public are characteristics of people that even I have had the misfortune of coming into contact with. It immediately triggered two distinctly relevant moments. First, it reminded me of the fiery debate triggered by Annie Leonard's story of stuff. Her views were automatically dubbed extreme, mainly--in my opinion-- due to her attempt at taking people (yes, even children!) out of their comfort zone. Second, it reminds me how pertinent this manifestation of glorifying easy has been to me. In a recent post, I discussed my summer job at a non-profit organization called Environment New York. My job was to canvass (often unpleasant) New Yorkers in an attempt to inform them about the environment and weasel some sort of contribution out of them. More often than not, it was the man riding by on his bicycle, the woman holding a reusable grocery bag that would snipe at me when asked if he or she had a minute for the environment. Often, the response I got was "I'm pretty sure I already do my part, thanks!" My grievances-of-a-canvasser story goes to serve two functions. This "already doing my part" sentiment is far too common. I offer my second point with a ray of hope. Often, the least educated (in terms of environmental issues) people were the ones most eager to contribute. This, to me, instills hope in our population. Our public can be offered the fact without being scared away or deterred from doing anything at all.