George Will has a
great column today on the psychology of environmentalism, the
recession and Mike Judge's new prime-time cartoon, The Goode
Family, which is worth quoting at length:
[A] New York Times television critic disapproves. The
show "feels aggressively off-kilter with the current mood, as
if it had been incubated in the early to mid-'90s, when it was
possible to find global-warming skeptics among even the
reasonable and informed." That is a perfect (because completely
complacent) sample of the grating smugness of the
planet-savers, delivered by an entertainment writer: Reasonable
dissent is impossible..."The Goode Family" does not
threaten Jonathan Swift's standing as the premier
English-language satirist. But when a Goode child apologizes to
his parent for driving too much, and the parent responds, "It's
OK ... what's important is that you feel guilty about it," the
program touches upon an important phenomenon: ecology as
psychology.
In "The Green Bubble: Why Environmentalism Keeps Imploding"
(The New Republic, May 20), Ted Nordhaus and Michael
Shellenberger, authors of "Break Through: Why We Can't Leave
Saving the Planet to Environmentalists," say that a few years
ago, being green "moved beyond politics." Gestures--bringing
reusable grocery bags to the store, purchasing a $4 heirloom
tomato, inflating tires, weatherizing windows--"gained fresh
urgency" and "were suddenly infused with grand significance."
Green consumption became "positional consumption" that
identified the consumer as a member of a moral and intellectual
elite. A 2007 survey found that 57 percent of Prius purchasers
said they bought their car because "it makes a statement about
me." Honda, alert to the bull market in status effects,
reshaped its 2009 Insight hybrid to look like a
Prius. Nordhaus and Shellenberger note the telling
"insignificance," as environmental measures, of planting
gardens or using fluorescent bulbs. Their significance is
therapeutic, but not for the planet. They make people feel
better:"After all, we can't escape the fact that we depend on
an infrastructure--roads, buildings, sewage systems, power
plants, electrical grids, etc.--that requires huge quantities
of fossil fuels. But the ecological irrelevance of these
practices was beside the point."
The point of "utopian environmentalism" was to reduce guilt.
During the green bubble, many Americans became "captivated by
the twin thoughts that human civilization could soon come
crashing down--and that we are on the cusp of a sudden leap
forward in consciousness, one that will allow us to heal
ourselves, our society, and our planet. Apocalyptic fears meld
seamlessly into utopian hopes." Suddenly, commonplace acts --
e.g., buying light bulbs--infused pedestrian lives with cosmic
importance. But:"Greens often note that the changing global
climate will have the greatest impact on the world's poor; they
neglect to mention that the poor also have the most to gain
from development fueled by cheap fossil fuels like coal. For
the poor, the climate is already dangerous."
Now, say Nordhaus and Shellenberger, "the green bubble" has
burst, pricked by Americans' intensified reluctance to pursue
greenness at a cost to economic growth. The dark side of
utopianism is "escapism and a disengagement from reality that
marks all bubbles, green or financial." Re-engagement with
reality is among the recession's benefits.
"Re-engagement with reality is among the recession's benefits."
This would be true, except that DC royalty sees in this climate
farce a chance for a massive power and money grab. Glad that 95%
of Americans don't use electricity so their taxes won't go up.
Pete| 6.4.09 @ 10:17AM
"Re-engagement with reality is among the recession's benefits."
This would be true, except that DC royalty sees in this climate farce a chance for a massive power and money grab. Glad that 95% of Americans don't use electricity so their taxes won't go up.