Have a look at this piece that NY Times columnist Stanley Fish wrote a summer or two back. What do you make of his struggling to be a "good environmentalist?" What do you think it means to live in an "environmentally friendly" way in the modern-day US?
I thoroughly enjoyed Stanley Fish’s article, “I am therefore I Pollute” because I know (myself included) so many people that continue to struggle with the new green movement and changing their lifestyles to fit the mold of what is “green”. One issue is making them believers of the movement and the other is actually putting in the extra effort to turn off televisions and spend the money for the reusable water bottle instead of 20 packs of water bottles (even though THAT is economically more efficient!).
Fish to me appears to be in a place where he is struggling not only to be more environmentally friendly but also to be okay with it. When his wife nags him to get the more environmentally friendly toilet paper he seems annoyed with having to change brands, same with the paper towels and last with his remodeled kitchen. His issue comes down to understanding why it is all such a big deal? He knows the basics, throwing paper towels away = bad because it equates to garbage in landfills. However I see the reasons for his hesitation to changing his lifestyle, it is similar to his issues with locally grown beef. He simply didn’t grow up eating it, just like he simply didn’t grow up having to use reusable rags or worry about disposing of napkins. Humans are creatures of habit and breaking or changing that habit can be very difficult. Maybe the generations that are now growing up as babies to the green movement will not have as much difficulty and maybe this is improvement, however it is important to remember that the current generation simply has to make these lifestyle changes or else that baby generation might not have the change to continue their lifestyles!
No comments:
Post a Comment