|
|
楼主 |
发表于 2012-6-16 23:27:05
|
显示全部楼层
转帖《环保论错在那里?Environmentalism has failed》
转帖《环保论错在那里?Environmentalism has failed》
最近，铃木认为----Environmentalism - 环保论是失败的。
他指出在超过五十年前，环保份子成功提高一般人对环保行动的认知和警觉。但当时的环保行动成功改变了政府对于砍伐木材的条例，停止大形水坝项目和离岸钻油以及正视减低绿气排放的重要性。但环保份子当时太过集中于对抗敌人和游说公众意见而忽略了更重要的一点-教育国民的世界观。
环保行动必需帮助人民了解人与万物的联系 - 因为我们只是世界上一小份子。
而我们的生存却要依靠地球上其他生物的健康。曾几何时，人类是游枚民族。基于人数细小，就算我们打猎为生，对于其他生态和环境亦不会带来太过大的伤害。就算当人类慢慢演变为以耕种为生，我们依然关心和保护我们的环境-因为农业社会明白土壤，季节，气侯，昆虫和植物是多么息息相关。
2012年是全球环保行动五十周年。在1962年，美国海洋生物专家Rachel Carson出版了 Silent Spring - 无声的春天。这书的主旨是暴露出人类在发展和推动所为的‘文明科学’同时对于我们的自然环境带来多大的伤害。Rachel Carson 的Silent Spring 集中于DDT杀虫药对于我们的健康和生态的健康造成不能弥补的结果和祸害。当Rachel Carson 的无声的春天出版之后，全球过百万人集合起来要求各地政府正视环保的重。事实上，当时的政府连环境部都未有。但到了1972年，联合国就在瑞典首都斯德哥尔摩成立有史以来首个全球环保会议。很不幸，1972年的全球会议展开之后，国际间不断发生环境灾难 -漏油事故，漏化学物质事故，甚至核漏事故。与此同时，生态面临绝种，大气层减薄，酸雨问题，全球气候暖化不断面世。当时环保行动还可以成功推动政府设国家公国和保留地，让自然生态有唿吸的空间。
到了1992年，环保行动开始30年之后，全球首脑在巴西里约热内卢进行首个地球峰会，而目的真正是发放保卫全球环境健康的讯息-提出未来全球各国的经济发展必须包含保卫环境的考虑。
但时至今日，大家都知道当全球经济下滑，真正代价就是我们对于环保的承诺。我们的要求被指不设实际，我们每天都被提醒经济和环保不能并存。但这说法的真确性就等同于我们近年所经历的经济泡沫!
很明显，真正的逻辑是刚刚相反 - 没有健康环境根本就没有稳健经济可言!
By David Suzuki
Environmentalism has failed. Over the past 50 years, environmentalists have succeeded in raising awareness, changing logging practices, stopping mega-dams and offshore drilling, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But we were so focused on battling opponents and seeking public support that we failed to realize these battles reflect fundamentally different ways of seeing our place in the world. And it is our deep underlying worldview that determines the way we treat our surroundings.
Subscribe to Science Matters
We have not, as a species, come to grips with the explosive events that have changed our relationship with the planet. For most of human existence, we lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers whose impact on nature could be absorbed by the resilience of the biosphere. Even after the Agricultural Revolution 10,000 years ago, farming continued to dominate our lives. We cared for nature. People who live close to the land understand that seasons, climate, weather, pollinating insects, and plants are critical to our well-being.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of the birth of the environmental movement. In 1962, Rachel Carson published Silent Spring, which documented the terrible, unanticipated consequences of what had, until then, been considered one of science's great inventions, DDT. Paul Mueller, who demonstrated the effects of the pesticide, was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1948. In the economic boom after the Second World War, technology held out the promise of unending innovation, progress, and prosperity. Rachel Carson pointed out that technology has costs.
Carson's book appeared when no government had an environment department or ministry. Millions around the world were soon swept up in what we now recognize as the environmental movement. Within 10 years, the United Nations Environment Programme was created and the first global environmental conference was held in Stockholm, Sweden.
With increasing catastrophes like oil and chemical spills and nuclear accidents, as well as issues such as species extinction, ozone depletion, deforestation, acid rain, and global warming, environmentalists pressed for laws to protect air, water, farmland, and endangered species. Millions of hectares of land were protected as parks and reserves around the world.
Thirty years later, in 1992, the largest gathering of heads of state in history met at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The event was meant to signal that economic activity could not proceed without considering ecological consequences. But, aided by recessions, popped financial bubbles, and tens of millions of dollars from corporations and wealthy neoconservatives to support a cacophony of denial from rightwing pundits and think tanks, environmental protection came to be portrayed as an impediment to economic expansion.
This emphasis of economy over environment, and indeed, the separation of the two, comes as humanity is undergoing dramatic changes. During the 20th century, our numbers increased fourfold to six billion (now up to seven billion), we moved from rural areas to cities, developed virtually all of the technology we take for granted today, and our consumptive appetite, fed by a global economy, exploded. We have become a new force that is altering the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the planet on a geological scale.
In creating dedicated departments, we made the environment another special interest, like education, health, and agriculture. The environment subsumes every aspect of our activities, but we failed to make the point that our lives, health, and livelihoods absolutely depend on the biosphere — air, water, soil, sunlight, and biodiversity. Without them, we sicken and die. This perspective is reflected in spiritual practices that understand that everything is interconnected, as well as traditional societies that revere "Mother Earth" as the source of all that matters in life.
When we believe the entire world is filled with unlimited "resources" provided for our use, we act accordingly. This "anthropocentric" view envisions the world revolving around us. So we create departments of forests, fisheries and oceans, and environment whose ministers are less concerned with the health and well-being of forests, fish, oceans, or the environment than with resources and the economies that depend on them.
It's almost a cliché to refer to a "paradigm shift", but that is what we need to meet the challenge of the environmental crises our species has created. That means adopting a "biocentric" view that recognizes we are part of and dependent on the web of life that keeps the planet habitable for a demanding animal like us.
==== from
http://taiyangbao.ca/opinion/62675/?variant=zh-hans
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs ... f-environmentalism/ |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2012-1-26 14:37:28
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡
发表于 2012-6-17 17:59:37
