“We were working for nonprofit groups
funded by the contributions of concerned people. Give us enough to
keep food on the table, pay rent, buy a six-pack – we didn't want
to get rich. But a changes occurred in the mid-1970s. Now young
people seeking to work for conservation groups were career-oriented,
they had relevant degrees...they saw in environmental organizations
in the same light as jobs in the government or industry. One was a
stepping stone to another, more powerful position later on. They were
less part of a cause and more part of a profession (Foreman, Earth
First!, 329).”
Foreman’s paper chronicles the
factors that led to the creation of Earth First!, a radical
environmentalist group. I was saddened to read the above mentioned
section; putting more focus on moving up the career ladder and undermining the group's original cause. It reminded me of Aldo Leopold's warnings mentioned in A
Sand County Almanac, specifically about the state of education
and economic values in relation to perceptions of nature of his time.
Mixing the pursuit of ecological and economic progress seems to be
highly problematic, even in present day society. “Perhaps the most
serious obstacle impeding the evolution of a land ethic is the fact
that our educational and economic system is headed away from, rather
than toward, an intense consciousness of land (Also Leopold, A Sand
County Almanac, 223).” The problems Leopold faced at the time his
book was published seemed to only have been exacerbated as
generational modes of thought and values started to shift in the
mid-seventies.
Do you think having a predominantly
career-oriented mindset could ever be an acceptable in efforts to
promote the health of the Earth? Will radical environmentalist groups
and activities continue to be the go-to tactic for bringing
environmental issues to the foreground?
I keep being confronted by the worry that environmental change, because it would likely need to be enforced, would necessarily be bureaucratic, and this seems to be really unlike what these environmentalist writers are hoping for. Ideally it would become a widespread movement, supported by normal people, but our society is so economically (commercially) focused that I can't imagine families buying wooden toys for their children to keep forever, for example. Even if something like this became popular, it may have to be something trendy, not substantive.
ReplyDeleteWhile I would hope that those who work for environmental change work for the right motives, I understand why the career-oriented mindset has become more dominant today. Ideally, individuals would work for causes they believe in without considering other factors such as money. However, I think that Foreman neglects the fact that it is just not feasible for many individuals to work for an environmental group without thinking about money. Even those individuals need to make some money in order to make a living. Now that environmentalists can make a career our of their work, I would like to think that more individuals will work for environmental change. While it is possibly a good thing that more individuals will work for environmental groups, I still hope that these people still legitimately care about environmental problems.
ReplyDelete