Journal 5

To start this journal, I would like to define a utopia that I think the United States should strive to achieve within the next fifty years.  With a few basic attainable goals, we can help reverse many wrongs that people have committed against the environment.  I would also like to create a model that defines human nature.  With this model we can better address our environmental problems.

As American’s, we need to reduce carbon emissions by 65% in the next fifty years.  This is a major step in the fight to preserve the environment.  Carbon emissions are responsible for many environmental problems including the overall rise of the Earths average temperature.  Creating more alternatives to fossil fuel and oil consumption, such as hybrid cars, can help achieve this goal. 

            Next the United States needs to create more incentives to firms to not pollute.  The cap and trade system is a good way to start.  Cap and trade is a government policy that caps the amount of pollution that is able to enter the atmosphere.  They give firms pollution “credits” and if these firms don’t use all of the credits they are able to sell them for cash to other firms.  This is a good government regulation because it has a capitalistic twist.

            Obviously in the next 50 years a lot must be modified to the cap and trade system because the amount of pollution emitted needs to be reduced.  This can be done be reducing the amount of “Credits” in circulation and offering great incentives (tax breaks) to firms that pollute less than say, set quota. 

            The thing that I want to stress the most is humans should not have to compromise their living standards in an effort to help the environment.  Americans, and the rest of the world, can do things to help the environmental cause without giving up a certain lifestyle in which we all have become accustomed to.   Ultimately people have tremendously from the time when they nothing and were not causing environmental harm.  We have tasted the fruits of increased technology, and we are simply not able to do without the material items we have today.

            People have certain inherent values that they are born with.  I believe that these values or instincts are ones of self-interest.  In other words every human being strives to better himself before he or she looks out for others.  These values are something that we are born with and it takes a “push” for people to give up their own self-interest and strive to better other entities.

            The United States is a country that bases itself on excess.  Instead of saving, Americans strive to gain more.  I believe this is also a trait that humans are born with.  Humans are never satisfied with what they have and it is natural to want more.  This goes back to the idea of self-interest.  Humans always want more (excess) because they are striving to better themselves or reach their next goal.

            To continue this model of humanity, I will propose that material items promote happiness.  When a person owns a nice house, car, boat, takes expensive vacations etc…he or she feels more successful than she otherwise would which leads to a feeling of happiness.  I would like to show this issue on a smaller scale to better prove my point.  When I purchase something at the mall, I have a feeling of happiness and excitement.  Also, with time, this good or service becomes something that we become accustomed to and we feel a need or entitlement to have more.  I agree that other things contribute to happiness as well such as love, family and friends.  In the end material goods and services create a higher comfort level, which leads to increased happiness.

            Because humans are born with these traits, there needs to be an outside actor that makes sure that we do not destroy the environment in our pursuit of happiness.  The government is the perfect candidate to be this actor.  I would like to make something clear.  The government cannot force us to give up what we have.  Instead they should strive to address environmental problems through setting goals (such as reducing carbon emissions) and making sure they are met.

            In conclusion, we have a problem with the environment but this problem does not merit compromising lifestyles.  We are born with an inherent value of looking out for our own self-interest.  We do this by purchasing material items in order to achieve a greater state of happiness.  To take away our ability to have excess would go against human nature.  Instead, government needs to follow through with policy that attacks the issues of environmental pollution.  With the implementation of these policies we can address our problems.

Journal 4

            The book A Conservationist Manifesto by Scott Russell Sanders is book that looks at ways to preserve life on planet earth.  Sanders has some very extreme views that I, personally, find difficult to relate to.  He has a clear agenda to have people live more simply in order to preserve the planet for generations to come.

            The book starts by talking about building “Arks” This is a direct reference to the book of Genesis when Noah was told to build an arch for himself and a male and female of every species while the forty-day flood came and destroyed all evil in the world.  Because of this an “Ark” to Sanders is land that is dedicated to the preservation of the Earth.  Although some people are doing this, the whole world needs to be viewed as an arch in order for the planet to be saved.

            The amount of consumption by the human population is cited for being the reason why the earth is being destroyed.  We have a demand for lots of material items and comfort.  If it is easier to drive than it is to bike (the environmental friendly alternative) we will of course always jump in the car and pollute the air.  Sanders feels like we have a sense of entititlement because we are bigger and smarter than all other species.  It is also generated from advertising, politics and the culture of always wanting more in society.  Advertising along the lines of, “One world revolving around you,” “I am what I shop,” and “It’s all about you” are what makes us an extremely consuming culture.  Sanders states, “While the world decays around us, we are urged to buy our way to security, as if we could withdraw inside a cocoon of money.  This story, the dominant one in America today, is a self-centered fantasy that leads to loneliness for the individual and disaster for the world” (pg. 36). This means that self-indulgence takes its toll on the planet and brings you further away from your friends and family.

            The author is painting a picture that American’s do what is best for them and disregard what is best for the community as a whole.  Sanders believes another image needs to be created quickly.  He is referring to a life of extreme simplicity.  A life where it is just living, sustaining energies, creatures, ideas and activities.  According the Sanders, in order to truly help the environment Americans must provide for themselves as many necessities as they can, share tools, and cars with neighbors and friends, and exchanging labor with others in the community.  Americans cannot rush from one pleasure to the next but instead savor the pleasures of nature.  This includes hanging clothes to dry (instead of using a dryer), cooking homegrown food (instead of driving to get fast food), and talking with friends and family instead of buying a ticket to the big game or concert. (Pg. 17).  Americans must think about the community, not the individual.

            While there is a big problem with pollution and deterioration of our natural recourses, there are better solutions than the one that Sanders is offering.  I believe in a more conservatist approach where we use our resources but in a way where we don’t waste.  Without waste, Americans could severely cut down the amount of damage that is occurring.

            The world has become a place where people maximize convenience by resources and technology.  By becoming more efficient through technology means individuals have a leg up on the rest of the world.  For example, I can get more done in one day by owning my own car, rather than biking, and grabbing a quick lunch (rather than growing it).  The more one can get done, the more attractive he/she becomes to an employer (who supplies income).

            Sanders view and agenda is silly and EXTREMELY unrealistic.  There is no way for the entire earth to become an “Ark”.  People have become accustomed living a certain life.  A lifestyle of personal consumption.  A lifestyle, that Sanders believes, where humans are intentionally  destroying the earth.  People will not take a step backwards when society is always moving forwards to create economic growth.  Sanders wont achieve his agenda of people living more simply by getting rid of their current lifestyles.

            Personally I will continue to use the resources given to me on this planet for the betterment of my life and career.  I think a better solution would be one where we preach to not waste.  This means that we can continue to live our lives the way we feel comfortable, we would just be more conscious not to waste what we have.