Sun, 06 Jun 2010
Don't "save the planet"
(Updated a few minutes after posting to clarify what I want.)
Lisa was visiting Philadelphia a few months ago. We were walking around the "Please Touch" Museum.
I don't remember how we got on the topic, but suddenly there we were. Lisa explained, exasperated, "The planet doesn't need saving. The planet will still be there, no matter what we do to it! It's humanity that needs saving."
On the surface, it's obviously correct: a warming climate won't change the fact that there is a planet with that climate. There's also a deeper truth that really struck me. I thought about the times I've been asked to recycle; as far as I can recall, it's been for a "greener planet." So I asked, "Do you think that, if we talked to people about saving humanity, rather than the planet, we'd have more success?"
"Of course," she replied.
In short
I want more people to say things like this: "Look, we're all racing toward the destruction of civilization. Do you want to contribute to that? No, right? So recycle. Here's how it helps."
In the future, when people ask me to minimize my carbon footprint, I want them to put things in more dire terms. And when companies talk about how they've "gone green," I want to hear them say, "We realized that civilization is on the brink of collapse. We decided that we didn't want to push it along." Some mumbling about how they've "gone green" and that "saves you green" doesn't make me excited.
Why do I hear "save the planet" rhetoric?
With Lisa, I wondered aloud about why we talk about saving the planet. I don't know a great deal about the history of the words used by what is now the conservation movement. You might imagine that, if we were to start a conservation movement today, we would quickly come to Lisa's conclusion and choose her terminology.
Today, instead, I imagine a coalition of many different groups on a conference call together. Some are promoting a broader sense of self- and earth-consciousness; closer to the hippie end of the spectrum, they have the laudable goal of bringing humans in touch with their bodies and the rest of the physical world we inhabit. I have the sense that these sorts of people are the inspiration and motivation behind a lot of conservation activists.
It feels good to publicly show allegiance to the people who are one's inspiration. But if it's true that other people would respond better to appeals not about the planet, and instead about saving civilization, then I would say that all this talk about the planet is just holding us back.
P.S. From Auto-Tune The News #2....
One of the Gregory Brothers has the following exchange with Katie Couric:
Katie Couric: "At the North Pole, new satellite photos show arctic ice is melting so fast"--
Gregory Brother: "Oh snap, how fast?"
Katie Couric: "Many scientists now predict it will be gone within thirty years."
Gregory Brother: "Surely you jest! I'm under cardiac arrest!"
When Katie leans in to warn, "Some researchers think, it could disappear in just six," the Gregrory Brother swears. As she discusses the importance of the polar ice, and how temperatures could rise even faster after it melts, the Gregory Brother looks increasingly scared. The segment concludes with Katie Couric's words (in two-part harmony), "If we all don't take bold action, and take it soon, we will find ourselves on very thin ice."
