Our
society, growth-dependent
economy and grossly
materialistic lifestyles are
based to a large extent on
values, attitudes and
aspirations deeply rooted in
man’s “more animal
than human ” nature,
which are causing us quite
literally to plunder
our planet. In view of what Darwin is
supposed to have taught us
about human
origins, this is hardly
surprising, but (like
Christian fundamentalists) we are not
facing up
to it.
Like many other people, I was
introduced to the concept of
sustainability and to
the need for constraints to
human activity on a planet
with limited resources and a
finite carrying capacity in the
early 1970’s, particularly
through publications such as
Man’s
social behaviour evolved over
millions of years to serve the
survival and advantage of
individuals and family groups
in the natural environment
;
there has been no time for it
to adapt to the much larger
social units of human
civilisations, which only
arose in the past few thousand
years. Besides which, the
natural environment has
effectively been replaced by
an artificial
Our
capitalist, free-market
economy has developed and been
honed to exploit our
primitive, animal nature
(our animal fears, greed, competitiveness,
our interest in sex, in free or cheap
lunches, in power, social
status etc.) - naturally
enough, which is why in
many respects it seems to work so
well. Unfortunately, apart
from being inherently unjust
and inhumane, it is also
fundamentally unsustainable. “Sustainability”
is now a major political issue
and many organisations are
dedicated to it, but few
realise (or have the courage
to say) just how dire our
situation aboard Spaceship
Earth really is, how
radical the changes must be,
or that it also requires
radical changes to many of our
values, attitudes and
(material) aspirations, some
of which we are very attached,
even addicted, to. We expend a great deal of intellectual skill and energy distracting and keeping ourselves in a state of denial, while rationalising our irrational and irresponsible behaviour (some have made a profession of it, finding or making for themselves, and then defending with animal ferocity, a lucrative niche in the socio-economic environment). What started out on a small, harmless scale, has developed exponentially
over the past century or so and
can now only be described as
the plundering of our
planet. Having grown
up with it, it seems quite normal, which is why we fail to recognise it for the
madness and monstrous
crime that it has now become; a crime against our own children and future
generations; a crime in which we are all participating, and on which we all
depend: oil and gas - two
familiar examples of the booty - are the life
blood of our economy. Because of the vast differences in scale, what took just seconds to become apparent when Apollo 13's life-support systems were damaged on its way to the Moon in 1970, is taking years aboard Spaceship Earth. For those with eyes to see, the signs are clear enough, but most do not want to see. Instead we are behaving as some people do when confronted with the symptoms of a life-threatening disease: either by denying them completely or by playing down their significance - which is what our politicians are doing: the Kyoto protocol, while being a step in the right direction, barely scratches the surface of the problem. Although, any politician who did recognise the magnitude and urgency of the Problem and said so publicly, would be branded a crank (like me) and declared unelectable. The
analogy of the sick patient can be taken further:
If we face up to the true significance of the
symptoms and the seriousness of our situation, we still have time to take the
radical measures necessary to avert disaster, i.e. the patient can still be
cured. At the moment, however, he is still in denial. Why are we so blind to (or in denial of) our perilous situation?
We call ourselves Homo sapiens, when Homo stupidus or Homo (whatever the Latin word is for 'blind') would be a more appropriate name. The name that I would choose is the Latin for "Ape aspiring towards humanity", thus suggesting the need for us to replace our present socio-economic order (based on our more animal than human nature) with one based on our more "enlightened ", human nature. Once
faced up to, our problem aboard Spaceship Earth and its solution are very
simple to understand. It is recognising and facing up to it that is the
main difficulty. THE PROBLEM is that our planet has
limited resources and a finite carrying capacity, while the demands placed on
it by our growth-dependent economy and
the grossly materialistic lifestyles
it engenders are insatiable. It is as simple as that. THE SOLUTION - in principle at least - is just as simple: Earth's six (soon 7 - 9) billion inhabitants must learn to live within (well within!) the limits set by its carrying capacity, which means replacing the non-sustainable economy and lifestyles (based on our "more animal than human " nature) we have at the moment with ones that are sustainable (based on our more enlightened, far less materialistic, human nature). The solution,
needless to say, will amount to the greatest revolution in human
history - one that
first has to occur inside
our heads and hearts,
however, before it can be
put into practice. At first
it is a scary proposition -
strongly inclining us to
keep our heads in the sand - but
it is
essential for our children
and coming generations that
we face up to the challenge.
Doing so will frustrate some
of our materialistic (more
animal than human)
aspirations, but will reward
us many times over,
transforming and enriching
our socially and spiritually impoverished
lives, as well as earning
for us the love and
appreciation, rather than
the curses, of our children
and coming generations. Some
people argue that we have plenty of time to make
the transition to
sustainability and can
leave most of it to coming generations. They are mistaken. Others
think it is already too late to achieve sustainability before Earth's carrying
capacity is reached. They may be right; but the more progress we make
towards sustainability before things start to break down, the less devastating
the consequences and the better our (or
our children's) chances of survival and recovery will be. One possible solution would be for a ruling elite to impose the necessary restrictions on the rest of the population, while continuing to enjoy its own extravagant life styles. However, I do not think that is an option that need (or should) be taken seriously. What I envisage is a democratic solution, one in which we all share responsibility for achieving sustainability and accept a necessary limit to the number of "straws" each of us can fairly place on the camel's back. Despite an increased awareness of the need for sustainability, our politicians foolishly assure us that we can have our cake and eat it, i.e. that we can have sustainability and seek to satisfy the ever increasing material demands and aspirations of Earth's 6-10 billion inhabitants. This is an expression of the madness referred to above. Individual
motorisation and unlimited air travel are
two of the most important examples of
non-sustainable developments. It should be obvious that global car
ownership and air travel
cannot reach current North American or Western European
levels without depleting
Earth's natural resources
and catastrophically
disrupting its climate and life-supporting
ecosystems. All political attempts to steer society in the direction of sustainability have, up until now, been hopelessly inadequate, because they do not recognise or face up to the root cause of the problem: a socio-economic order deeply rooted in man's primitive, "more animal than human " nature. The only way forward is for those of us who have come out of denial and realise what is at stake (and thus have the necessary motivation) to initiate the creation of an alternative, sustainable socio-economic order, based on our more enlightened, human nature. We do not have to start completely from scratch. Over the past 30 years or so a growing awareness of the importance of sustainability has occurred in many people's minds, preparing us for the impending revolution. The imperfect beginnings already exist in the form of things like organic farming, recycling, renewable energy, moral investment funds, fair trade, work cooperatives, the open-source community, etc. In some ways - but far from all - Prince Charles seems to be on the right path. It will be interesting to see if he is prepared to reduce the number of straws that he currently places on the camel's back to a fair and proportionate number.
|