Monday, October 26, 2009

Pessimism (Response #5)


The previous readings focused mainly on the attempts governments have made at controlling environmental change, and the reasons why many of these have not worked. The passages from Red Sky at Morning outline Speth’s argument that many of societies’ systems contribute to seemingly unstoppable positive feedback loops that may even be perpetuated by our attempts to limit them. Dryzek’s chapter on sustainable development offers a less biased view on the attempts governments have made to effect climate change in relation to economic development. Speth, as always, seems very pessimistic on humanity’s ability or willingness to prevent environmental catastrophe. He explains that the fervor of the environmental movement in the 70s was fueled by the experiences of individuals; environmental disasters had immediate and obvious effects on every day people, compared to the seemingly distant consequences of global climate change. According to Speth, the inherent complexity of the responses required to affect the global climate for the better severely clash with existing systems of governance and economics. While I agree with this general notion, I feel that Speth’s pessimism (while understandable) does not give credit where credit is due. Dryzek’s explanation of how the discourse of sustainable development slowly worked its way into international politics is a more balanced opinion. Dryzek does not hesitate to describe when and why policies fail, but offers this more as an example of how large scale change can happen gradually when it comes to politics instead of how governments are incapable of effective environmental policy. While Dryzek certainly tends to be less artistic with his writing, these sets of readings made me realize how much I enjoy studying political theory over studying more opinion based political writings. These readings make me yearn to learn more positive outlooks on environmental politics. When asked what I think should be done in order to solve environmental problems, I can only think of the failed examples I have learned about and all of the reasons why our way of life contributes to environmental disaster. I would really like to learn about current ideas that haven’t been proven to be useless or faulted yet.

1 comment:

  1. 4/5 I do enjoy Dryzek for that reason (though I realize that both of these authors have very obvious normative opinions about the environment. Speth can seem a little paternalistic though. What enjoy about Speth is learning this history of environmental governance. I'm hoping that our understanding of that history will give us a good understanding of ways forward from today onward.

    ReplyDelete