At the beginning of George Monbiot's book Heat, he gets environmentalist Mayer Hillman to answer the question "What will this country look like when you've finished with it?" Hillman grins, and replies: "A very poor third-world country".
It's an answer that would have brought joy into the hearts of many of the members of the environmental movement. At times one senses a thirsty relish within the movement for the social restructuring that lies ahead: there is no doubt that many (myself included) hope that it will be possible to survive the huge challenge of climate change as a kinder, more equable civilisation. There are many different dreams - of anarchist utopia, collectivisation, parties that just go on and on...
But what these dreamers sometimes forget is that there are also many people who like things just the way they are, thank you very much. They like their Ford Focus, they like the primroses that line their driveway, the latest series on ITV, a quick chat with the station master on the way to work, the window cleaner who comes on Thursdays, and their night out at the Italian restaurant in town once a fortnight. They have ordinary, quiet lives and they are perfectly happy with them.
George Marshall walks us through the pointlessness of many of the actions advocated by the government - not filling kettles up, turning lights off, saving plastic bags (that last, by the way, is motivated by concern about wasting resources and killing dolphins I think - I doubt climate change comes into it in anyone's thinking). He's right, these small things add up to very little.
But how, then, are we to get this solid mass of human beings moving? I think that Marshall is confusing the (yes, very annoying) suggestions from the government with the small local organisations and council officers and headteachers who are trying to put these things into practice. Children in schools, doing their green projects, making their parents turn off lights and writing letters about polar bears to Downing Street. And what about places like the Cheshire village of Ashton Hayes, trying to become zero-carbon, or Totnes in Devon going oil-free?
He mentions Modbury, the town which banned plastic bags. What will the aftermath of that campaign have been? Fewer plastic bags, sure, but also a local network for action, which can easily be reactivated. A general sense of the potential of autonomous action, and an opening of debate about these subjects. And some more detailed things - such as how to run a meeting, how to build a database of support, how to communicate quickly with plenty of people. Aren't these the building blocks for the much talked about grassroots action.
While these actions don't acheive much themselves: isn't the effect of taking them what we should be after? You could even argue that it gives us all a taste of collective action. But I think that might be pushing it.
It's an answer that would have brought joy into the hearts of many of the members of the environmental movement. At times one senses a thirsty relish within the movement for the social restructuring that lies ahead: there is no doubt that many (myself included) hope that it will be possible to survive the huge challenge of climate change as a kinder, more equable civilisation. There are many different dreams - of anarchist utopia, collectivisation, parties that just go on and on...
But what these dreamers sometimes forget is that there are also many people who like things just the way they are, thank you very much. They like their Ford Focus, they like the primroses that line their driveway, the latest series on ITV, a quick chat with the station master on the way to work, the window cleaner who comes on Thursdays, and their night out at the Italian restaurant in town once a fortnight. They have ordinary, quiet lives and they are perfectly happy with them.
George Marshall walks us through the pointlessness of many of the actions advocated by the government - not filling kettles up, turning lights off, saving plastic bags (that last, by the way, is motivated by concern about wasting resources and killing dolphins I think - I doubt climate change comes into it in anyone's thinking). He's right, these small things add up to very little.
But how, then, are we to get this solid mass of human beings moving? I think that Marshall is confusing the (yes, very annoying) suggestions from the government with the small local organisations and council officers and headteachers who are trying to put these things into practice. Children in schools, doing their green projects, making their parents turn off lights and writing letters about polar bears to Downing Street. And what about places like the Cheshire village of Ashton Hayes, trying to become zero-carbon, or Totnes in Devon going oil-free?
He mentions Modbury, the town which banned plastic bags. What will the aftermath of that campaign have been? Fewer plastic bags, sure, but also a local network for action, which can easily be reactivated. A general sense of the potential of autonomous action, and an opening of debate about these subjects. And some more detailed things - such as how to run a meeting, how to build a database of support, how to communicate quickly with plenty of people. Aren't these the building blocks for the much talked about grassroots action.
While these actions don't acheive much themselves: isn't the effect of taking them what we should be after? You could even argue that it gives us all a taste of collective action. But I think that might be pushing it.
No comments:
Post a Comment