tone change for the majority voice?

I wish I could agree with Maniates' assertions that as a nation, "we're grown-ups who understand the necessity of hard work and difficult choices" but unfortunately I don't think that's a truth that can be applied across the board in American society. Sure we believe in bold possibilities for the future and want to make a difference, but the snag is that this difference isn't going to be pursued if it's not of personal interest to a significant portion of people. Most "grown-ups" in this country understand the necessity of hard work as it applies to achievement and profit gain-- not the hard work of lessening their consumption or difficult choices between an affluent lifestyle and saving the planet. The real inconvenient truth to all of this is that we are and will continue to be a consumer nation above all else. Yes, we iconize MLK, Roosevelt and other leaders with abilities to speak frankly on hard topics BUT we also iconize the quick fix, and easy way out (hence the popularity and glorification of enviro self-help books like Maniates mentions) maybe now more than ever. But the icing on this is that with an alpha, capitalist mindset we're prone to believing there's a solution for everything and that eventually we'll develop the technologies to solve the current crisis of environmental degradation-- no problem. It seems we're just too good for our own good and consequently, for the sake of our planet.

So in terms of moving forward in this "vexing, knotty" issue of environmentalizing an entire nation, we must first move past the predicament of self-interest. This is not to say I don't agree that there are people in our society who legitimately seek ways to confront the planetary emergency at hand or that the greening movement is a waste of time, but rather that we need better champions to this if we're going to change tone and convince certain Americans that it takes more than recycling and fancy lightbulbs to save the planet for future generations.

Transportation of Products

What, to your mind, is the most pressing challenge facing the global environment? Why?

I think the biggest challenge facing the global environment is trying to overcome getting goods from far away places. It is the most difficult because it is very unlikely that most of the things that you find necessary for your life are available in your area. We are so globalized now that finding products that are local to us. The author made a good point by talking about how hard it is to fix something as simple as a kitchen. I also am against becoming a vegetarian as well. I do not enjoy eating veggies and crave meat and fish all the time. It is really hard to find "green meat" that I can afford. A lot of times its almost double the price for less taste. When I looked at my possessions I noticed that almost all of them are from outside the United States. Because of globalization it has also grown difficult to find American made products that have not flown all over the world.

In the end...Education is important!

Thinking after last week’s blog question, I pondered ways that we can contribute for sustainable environment. In one of the class discussion, I remember that doing small things like taking short showers does not really help the situation now (especially in the United States). As Maniates discussed in his article, “although each offers familiar advice ("reuse scrap paper before recycling" or "take shorter showers"), it's what's left unsaid by these books that's intriguing” (Maniate). If EVERYBODY did these small things it may result in a bigger difference. However, what is really necessary is something that will make a difference in the short term. These small efforts can be done for the long term, but we need to discuss short term methods.

The biggest (and probably the hardest) would be to think less for yourselves. As Maniates discussed, people tend to only act for themselves and not think about the environment too much. This must change in order to support the sustainable environment. Especially us, the U.S. citizens are highly educated and understand what is happening in the world. Then, why aren’t we the ones making the change? Because we are so educated and focused on economical success, we care less about the environment and demand wealth. In today’s class, we discussed that people demand more things, and even though our average income is increasing, people are not happy because with more money people demand more “things.” This is currently creating a negative cycle in this country that more money is resulting in more stuff, more using the resources, producing more waste..and the cycle continues. Recycling is effective, but there are many steps necessary for recycling. So what is our option? Think differently. Think more for the environment, think where you live and cherish where you live.

IF we don’t start thinking about this, there is no future; there may be a future for us, but definitely not for an infinite amount of time. We need to start thinking more, be conscious at all times. So before actually speaking of what specific programs we can do, we must change the way we think, so probably start educating the younger generations the severity of the environmental situation. The revised education system will allow the younger generation to be aware of the situation and understand what must be done sooner than later.

I feel like I am repeating myself from the last post, but revising the education system and adding a specific course even for environment may be effective is what I come at in the end....

What do you guys think??

Environmental Abuse

I thought it was really interesting that the author of "People, Nature, and Ethics," that environmental abuse is not only about how they treat the nonhuman world but also about how they treat each other. If people do not treat each other with respect and care for one another it makes it difficult to treat the nonhuman world with respect. I also agree with the author with the fact that liberalism hinders environmentalism. With liberalism people are searching for their own happiness and this goes against environmental ethics because with environmental ethics people have to put the environment above their own pleasures at times. The author also points out some very interesting points about how humans overuse resources and rarely replenish them. I think it is important for all to look at the example that the author shows of Japan who was once very self sufficient with lumber and now has dropped 30%. I think it is necessary for all of to watch what we consume. Our consumption in my opinion is the easiest thing to change. More importantly all of us can make a difference by making small cuts in our consumption.

Becoming Better Environmentalists

As Stanley Fish laments in his short piece for the New York Times, being environmentally friendly can sometimes be inconvenient and leaves many of us wondering, “Why bother?” I think changing our mentality is a large obstacle between us and being good environmentalists. Fish complains of the small, but irritating, changes his wife imposes on the household and he is certainly not alone in these feelings. While many willingly tote around reusable bags ( especially to save five cents...) and buy products stamped with the “green” label, there is a certain amount of resentment felt by others, like Fish, in feeling pressured to change their lifestyle or do more. It is important that we start seeing these life changes not as inconvenient or as a trend that will eventually pass, but as a realistic way of living now. A cultural shift seems to be a necessary step in creating a society of good environmentalists. And shouldn’t that really be our goal- everyone making preserving our environment a priority? Being an environmentalist shouldn’t be seen as being part of a fringe group or as something particularly extreme. While I can understand resistance to some choices touted as environmentally superior (such as becoming a vegetarian, not flying, or not having children), the changes brought up by Fish did not seem particularly extreme. Education will be an important part of creating this cultural shift towards protecting the environment and making changes. Incorporating environmental lessons into school curriculum could foster a generation that doesn’t see recycling as a nuisance or environmentally friendly light bulbs as “dim, ugly, and expensive” to quote Stanley Fish. Another obstacle in our communal effort to become more environmentally friendly is the price. All things eco-friendly, green, or organic seem to be significantly more expensive than the other options. I've heard people say that really only the wealthy or middle class can afford to be environmentally conscientious, but really, can any of us afford not to be given the costly consequences if we do not make these changes? It seems to me that the price of environmentally friendly goods and services and our view of these changes as inconvient are serious obstacles in making a society of better environmentalists.

Importance of Education and such...

There probably are numerous challenged facing the global environment today including pollution, global warming, limited resources…etc. However, the most pressing challenge facing the global environment is that so many people are unaware of this matter. Education allows people to learn about what is wrong, why it is a problem and how we can prevent them. But these people who have education access are very limited. My boyfriend has visited Beijing, China a few years ago and he was shocked when he saw the sky, dark and dirty. Of course, he had grown in the United States for his entire life so this view was abnormal. What do the Chinese citizens feel about this? Probably nothing, they may think that the dark sky is normal. This is just an example but a similar situation can happen everywhere and this is the challenge—how do we inform and educate people who are unaware of these severe environmental situations? The time is limited as these issues must be resolved, or at least start for improvement. Without knowing what is wrong and why it is necessary to fix the situation, there will be no improvement. So, to answer the question 1, the most pressing challenge facing the global environment is not being able to educate enough people. (If there ever was an ‘enough.’)

Stanley Fish’s article was quite interesting and I think many people can relate to him. Especially answering the first question and coming to this question, I think myself being educated about the environment; I have the responsibility to use that knowledge to improve the situation. To be a “good environmentalist” one must consider the environment as the priority. Stanley Fish is trying to do what he can do for the environment to be a “good environmentalist.” Yes, he sure is putting effort and thoughts to his actions but they are not quite simple and that is the struggle he faces. For example, he cannot become a vegetarian because he does not like vegetables. I have a friend who became a vegetarian for environmental reasons. I would classify that a “good environmentalist” would do such thing for the environment. I think this is what he is struggling—he cares about the environment and wants to help the global environment but cannot give up all his desire.

How can we live in an “environmentally friendly” way in the modern US? This is probably the most difficult question. There are so many products sold and food available that are “environmentally friendly” which results in high cost. Yes, there are many people in the US who are wealthy but that doesn’t automatically mean they can afford to live “environmentally friendly.” I don’t think there is anything special in particular that the United States citizens can do to be “environmentally friendly.” Everything is pretty much universal such as recycling, conserving energy and water, eating more vegetables and less meat, creating new programs and implementing them in the society etc.

“Good Environmentalist”

 In my mind, the term ‘environmentalist’ refers to someone who has some form of educational background dealing with environmental science and is actively participating to alleviate concerns dealing with environmental harm. In this case, I would not call Stanley Fish an ‘environmentalist’ or a ‘good environmentalist’ at that.  To me he is comparable to any human being, in this day and age who tries to do their part to help keep the planet green.  Fish clearly states in the beginning, “I don’t want to save the planet. I just want to inhabit it as comfortable as possible for as long as I have,” and who can blame him. It’s not an easy or cheap task to be eco-friendly and reduce ones carbon footprint, by recycling, choosing green products, or saving energy. This can be seen in Fish’s situation as he struggles with ways in which he can make his life more eco-friendly.

  His struggles delineate what living in a modern “environmentally friendly” U.S. is like. There are those who are aware of the issues concerning environmental change and want to be "green" by abiding by the 3Rs reuse, reduce, and recycle in hopes of alleviating the issue. And for some it just isn’t possible and the result is what Fish states, “But it is possible to believe something and still resist taking the actions your belief seems to require.” People for the most part are aware of the issues that could lead to the nonexistence of our planet, but don’t really do anything.