Blog #4

What do you think of “green values?”  Which ones do you most believe in?  What surprised you the most about the readings?

Overall, I like the ideals of green values. My interpretation is that they are rooted in equality of all people, a deeper understanding and appreciation for our role as members of the earth/environment/ecological system, and a rejection of dominating forces. The ones that I most believe in are: humans are a part of nature; we are cooperative; and we should problem-solve holistically and analytically. I am also in favor of and agree with a number of other green values. I liked the value related to changing the economic landscape to be less controlled by profit but by what is best for the dignity of the person and for the environment. I also believe in the transition away from an industrial society, because I feel like that contributes to a multitude of socio-economic, environmental, and health problems. The idea presented by ecological humanism that humans should not be constricted for the sake of protecting the environment is something I agree with, but I feel like when other people think of “being green” they think they will have to sacrifice their freedoms. Within social ecology, I like the opposition to domination. I agree, noting good can come of it, but a world of good can come from viewing one another as equals. Finally, I appreciate that radical ecology calls for individual reflection. This reminds me of the ancient Socratic wisdom that “the unexamined life is not worth living.”

The grassroots democracy idea of the left green network is interesting and appealing, and I hope that bottom-up change can make an impact, but I’m just not very confident that it can incite the kind of radical societal changes called for by green values. However, I understand that it would be hypocritical to be a part of the system this movement is opposing.  

In “ Defining Environmentalism” I was surprised at the sentiment that we must be antagonists to civilization and that humans are only contributors to the “environmental crisis” This is a little extreme. Also, why population control? I feel as though it is not about limiting people from having children, which is what I think of when I hear population control, but rather re-locating ourselves in a way that is more environmentally friendly, perhaps by not congesting and burdening cities with a large, concentrated population, but having smaller cities. And furthermore, the left green principle of social ecology says that “overpopulation” is not to be blamed. Perhaps I am just misinterpreting the concept in “Defining Environmentalism,” or could these be two different interpretations or even different ideals that point to some kind of disjunction?