![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
openspace4lifeI think the problem with some people who deny that there is an environmental crisis, or that its solution requires any drastic societal change, is that they value freedom too highly.
Now, I admit that freedom is definitely an extremely important thing, despite the somewhat nebulous and multifaceted nature of the concept; for example, I think free food for those incapable of supporting themselves should be valued more highly than free trade and free markets, but that's a topic for another post.
The point is that there is one thing that undoubtedly must be valued ahead of freedom: survival. Maybe not individual survival; if your personal motto is "live free or die," I have nothing against that. Nor am I talking about giving up civil liberties in exchange for a little more protection against terrorist attacks. Even a nuclear-armed terrorist can't do anything like the kind of damage that would result from biosphere collapse. As stated in my first post, biosphere collapse quite possibly threatens the survival of the entire human race.
It isn't just that this threat is less immediate or obvious than others that we face. It's also that some people want to persist, at all cost, in believing that nothing should be allowed to restrict their freedom to consume as much as they want, or the corporations' and governments' freedom to do whatever it takes to maximize profits and economic growth. As long as so many people believe this, we as a society will be unable to face the threat of biosphere collapse or counter it in any meaningful way.
(originally posted October 23, 2003)
Now, I admit that freedom is definitely an extremely important thing, despite the somewhat nebulous and multifaceted nature of the concept; for example, I think free food for those incapable of supporting themselves should be valued more highly than free trade and free markets, but that's a topic for another post.
The point is that there is one thing that undoubtedly must be valued ahead of freedom: survival. Maybe not individual survival; if your personal motto is "live free or die," I have nothing against that. Nor am I talking about giving up civil liberties in exchange for a little more protection against terrorist attacks. Even a nuclear-armed terrorist can't do anything like the kind of damage that would result from biosphere collapse. As stated in my first post, biosphere collapse quite possibly threatens the survival of the entire human race.
It isn't just that this threat is less immediate or obvious than others that we face. It's also that some people want to persist, at all cost, in believing that nothing should be allowed to restrict their freedom to consume as much as they want, or the corporations' and governments' freedom to do whatever it takes to maximize profits and economic growth. As long as so many people believe this, we as a society will be unable to face the threat of biosphere collapse or counter it in any meaningful way.
(originally posted October 23, 2003)
