More Discourses

Continuing with Dryzek’s descriptions of political discourses, this week was focused primarily on administrative rationalism and democratic pragmatism. I think that the best way to differentiate between the two is conveniently provided by the chapter titles “Leave it to the Experts” and “Leave it to the People”. The first discourse dictates that government appointed experts in the field should delegate environmental policy. The second, that governments and corporations should democratically respond to public opinion.

In discussing the drawbacks to the two discourses, I realized how I have observed their effects in every day life, particularly of democratic pragmatism. One of its drawbacks is a somewhat deceptive response of corporations in order to placate public demands called “green washing”. With the demand for “green” products on the rise, corporations may mislead consumers by claiming a product is environmentally friendly when other aspects of it may not be at all. For example, the label on a box of green tea I bought the other day assured me that each tea bag was biodegradable. When I got home and opened the box I realized that each biodegradable tea bag was individually wrapped in (obviously non-biodegradable) cellophane. In the case of administrative rationalism, agencies developed to develop environmental policy may be ineffective when the “experts” manning them benefit from the very industries they are supposed to keep in check, or when agencies do not communicate and counteract each other’s actions.

It may be that the only way to effectively over come these two discourses’ shortcomings is to combine them. Allowing for transparency of the policies created by the agencies installed by administrative rationalism will create more accountability for failed policies and agencies. Using administrative rationalism to ensure that the public has an informed opinion would prevent a “tyranny of the majority”.

Food Party!

This past week we have been studying the main discourses of environmental politics. In Politics of the Earth, Dryzek describes four discourses, breaking each of them down to its main elements: problem solving, survivalism, sustainability, and green radicalism. At first, I had some difficulty understanding Dryzek’s method of categorizing the discourses but after further reading I am slowly grasping their nuances. I also received some unexpected and yet highly entertaining inspiration from the new 3D animated film “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs”.

The film tells the tale of a tiny island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean called Swallow Falls. A young, socially awkward inventor by the name of Flint Lockwood invents a device that converts water to food, making the island a tourist destination and its residence quite over weight. However, the machine malfunctions producing mutant giant food that threatens to destroy not only the town, but also much of the rest of the world. Despite protests from a greedy mayor, Flint must disarm the machine at the expense of the island’s (and his own) fame and fortune.

This seems to be an obvious criticism of the Promethean discourse. Flint’s machine seems to magically convert water into unlimited quantities of food, reflecting the Promethean belief that, with enough energy, any resource can be obtained from another. This literal raining down of resources is automatically received as an undeniable good to the islanders. When food starts to clog the streets, the islander’s launch the munchies onto “Mt. Leftovers” which is supported by a “most likely unbreakable damn”. The mayor insists upon the unchecked conversion of water into food in order to secure the tourist industry, despite warnings from Flint, his meteorologist friend, and common sense. This thinly veiled metaphor for unrelenting economic growth is presented in an extremely comical light, perhaps to demonstrate how obvious of a problem we face today. Flint’s food convertor might also be a metaphor for the Green Revolution of the 20th century. While the islanders are definitely being fed better than they were before, they are so at the expense of the environment and their own safety, similar to the effects of synthetic nitrogen, pesticides, and GMOs.

Like many other “climate disaster movies”, “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” reveals the evils and potential dangers of unchecked industrial growth. However, because of its light and comical nature I feel that this movie may be especially effective at targeting a younger audience.

Statistically, We're Screwed.

This week's readings focused primarily on statistics and examples of how various human activities have negatively impacted the world we live in. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment seems to be purposefully overwhelming with its amount of data. Red Sky at Morning, Speth takes on an almost preaching tone while he describes the numerous instances where human development has virtually destroyed many ecosystems once prolific on this planet. I found these readings troubling, at the very least. While I have always had an interest in environmentalism, I have never been exposed to the actual statistics of how dramatic the situation is.

While Speth’s tone may sometimes be too dramatic and condemning, it is effective in that the reader is compelled to read on in hopes of an answer to the crisis he describes. I, for one, am eager to see how he expands on ways to counteract the damage caused. I was most interested in the section in chapter three where he discusses the need for change in public policy in order to facilitate environmental change, particularly in regards to developing states.

The issue of the environmental impact created by developing countries was also touched upon in the film “Endangered Planet”. The people living in these countries are forced to view environmentalism as a luxury reserved for those who can afford to deviate from inexpensive and yet deleterious methods of production. I agree with Speth when he says that “It is doubtful…the developing nations will act on their emissions unless the industrial nations…validate the seriousness of the issue and demonstrate their commitment to action by taking steps first”. Also, Speth links excessive deterioration of natural environments to corrupt governments, citing the example that 80% of timber taken from the Amazon is illegally felled. With this in mind, it is very easy to see why poorer countries ruled by corrupt governments would be difficult to reach without large-scale international pressure. This pressure can only be applied once we ourselves implement reforms on our own systems.

The other day while stumbling around on the internet I read an article that seemed somewhat relevant, or at least symbolic. A soldier in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was eaten by a hippopotamus while illegally fishing (Source: news.yahoo.com). I think we should all take a hint.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090912/wl_africa_afp/drcongomilitaryanimalenvironment_20090912175132

The Tree Contemplates Me

In Red Sky at Morning, author James Gustav Speth laments that “…the only way to save the marvelous world we inherited is to convince people that it is worth more economically alive than dead”. Sources like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment exist in order to convince policy makers of the value of protecting natural resources and other species. The MEA only briefly touches on the intrinsic value that the natural world has, that the other inhabitants share the same ethical right to live that we assign humans. The argument that humans inherently owe the natural world ethical treatment finds difficulty taking hold in the masses possibly due to the argument’s fundamental nature. In confronting nature, a human essentially confronts the ultimate Other. Western society’s historic oppression of the Other shows that improvements will not be made until ethical rights are extended to protect it.

The philosophical notion of the Other is the product of separating one’s self from its surroundings, differentiating between the subject and the object. On a larger scale, the Other may be used to describe minority groups, gender-identities, and paradigms that do not align with the status quo. In the case of the natural world and western society, Mother Nature is a mysterious and dangerous Other that can and must be conquered and commoditized. Like a slave at auction, she is stripped of her intrinsic value and instead marked with a price tag. The ideals of unbridled economic expansion and development clash against the natural cycles that delicately and dutifully regulate our environment. It is speculated that continuing trends will irreversibly destroy much of the Earth’s ecosystems in the foreseeable future.

In the case of race and gender related rights, the Other is no longer (or is less) oppressed when the majority realizes the Other is also a subject. Obviously, this is much harder to do in the case of nature, as it definitively non-human. However, in Martin Buber’s “I Contemplate the Tree”, the author recognizes and confronts his alienation from nature.

He first describes viewing the tree as object, ignorant of its intricacies and uniqueness. He then goes on to describe being “…drawn into a relation, (where) the tree ceases to be an it”. Buber’s tree is no longer just an object to his subjectivity, but a subject all its own. It must “deal” with Buber as he deals with it, that is inevitably the tree is in some way perceiving his presence and objectifying him. The duality of each individual is both an object and subject at the same time demonstrates and interconnectedness and similarity between the individuals, perhaps even that they are one in the same. As Buber puts it: relation is reciprocity.

Historically, oppression of and rejecting the Other is achieved through dehumanization (slavery once again being a prime example). The very word “dehumanize” suggests an alienation from other species. Mistreating a human degrades them to that of what is essentially non-human. Environmentalism struggles to overcome this dilemma, but as Speth points out and the MEA proves, the natural world may only be salvageable by commoditizing it further.

I Blog, You Blog

Testing, testing, one, two, three...