"I was talking about the radical environmentalists," Santorum said. "That's why I was talking about energy. This idea that man is here to serve the earth, as opposed to husband its resources and being good stewards of the earth, and I think that is a phony ideal."
--Rick Santorum, as reported by David Lerman in Business Week
There is an implicit critique in Santorum's remarks that Environmentalism must confront: the misanthropic tendency to degrade humanity for the environmental harm it has caused. It is likely this strain of Environmentalist thinking that Santorum referenced in the quote above. Of course, humanity, through the act of living alone, cannot help but to have some degree of impact on the Earth. The modern pattern of post-industrial life, however, creates a greater than tolerable impact. When man's consumption of resources veers towards a more extreme level of ecological disturbance, Environmentalism ought to respond critically towards such disturbance - without denigrating humanity itself as the villain.
In reality, man is neither less than nor greater than nature; man is an integrated part of an interconnected whole. Put another way, we must operate from a world view that sees man as a part of nature, not apart from it. Humanity cannot survive - let alone thrive - independent of the Earth. All life depends upon the delicately balanced, nurturing presence of a healthy environment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are good stewards and have a responsibility as good stewards. Why? Because unlike the Earth, we're intelligent and we can actually manage things. Leaving things to nature, as those on the radical environmentalist would like to do, don't touch anything, leave it alone. Nature will take care of itself. Yes it will, but it won't be pretty. We can actually manage and husband things."
--Rick Santorum, as reported by Juana Summers in Politico
To live is to affect nature; doing "no thing" is not congruent with living. Man has a greater ability to affect nature and the environment than any other species. In this context, "stewardship"* should include the responsibility for this generation to ensure that environmental integrity and ecological health are conserved to guarantee the well-being of future generations. Indeed, our quality of life depends upon preserving environmental quality - clean air, clean water and a stable climate. Any planned consumption of natural resources should only be undertaken in a manner consistent with maintaining a sustainable, high-quality environment for future life. Contrary to this view, what Santorum actually seems to propose is the extraction and harvest of any accessible natural capital, and the transfer of public resources to private industry. Living sustainably in a symbiotic relationship with the Earth does not pre-suppose totalitarian government control of life and the economy.** Increased efficiency of resource use - consumption harmonized with ecology - offers entrepreneurial opportunity. To serve the Earth and preserve its natural capital is, in essence, to act as a good steward for humanity and all life.
(*Stewardship: "the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one's care.")
(**On the topic of climate change, Santorum has stated that: "[Climate change is] an absolute travesty of scientific research that was motivated by those who, in my opinion, saw this as an opportunity to create a panic and a crisis for government to be able to step in and even more greatly control your life...I for one never bought the hoax." Climate science knowledge here. A future post will further chase the "Environmentalism: government control vs. entrepreneurial opportunity" issue.)
--Rick Santorum, as reported by David Lerman in Business Week
There is an implicit critique in Santorum's remarks that Environmentalism must confront: the misanthropic tendency to degrade humanity for the environmental harm it has caused. It is likely this strain of Environmentalist thinking that Santorum referenced in the quote above. Of course, humanity, through the act of living alone, cannot help but to have some degree of impact on the Earth. The modern pattern of post-industrial life, however, creates a greater than tolerable impact. When man's consumption of resources veers towards a more extreme level of ecological disturbance, Environmentalism ought to respond critically towards such disturbance - without denigrating humanity itself as the villain.
In reality, man is neither less than nor greater than nature; man is an integrated part of an interconnected whole. Put another way, we must operate from a world view that sees man as a part of nature, not apart from it. Humanity cannot survive - let alone thrive - independent of the Earth. All life depends upon the delicately balanced, nurturing presence of a healthy environment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are good stewards and have a responsibility as good stewards. Why? Because unlike the Earth, we're intelligent and we can actually manage things. Leaving things to nature, as those on the radical environmentalist would like to do, don't touch anything, leave it alone. Nature will take care of itself. Yes it will, but it won't be pretty. We can actually manage and husband things."
--Rick Santorum, as reported by Juana Summers in Politico
To live is to affect nature; doing "no thing" is not congruent with living. Man has a greater ability to affect nature and the environment than any other species. In this context, "stewardship"* should include the responsibility for this generation to ensure that environmental integrity and ecological health are conserved to guarantee the well-being of future generations. Indeed, our quality of life depends upon preserving environmental quality - clean air, clean water and a stable climate. Any planned consumption of natural resources should only be undertaken in a manner consistent with maintaining a sustainable, high-quality environment for future life. Contrary to this view, what Santorum actually seems to propose is the extraction and harvest of any accessible natural capital, and the transfer of public resources to private industry. Living sustainably in a symbiotic relationship with the Earth does not pre-suppose totalitarian government control of life and the economy.** Increased efficiency of resource use - consumption harmonized with ecology - offers entrepreneurial opportunity. To serve the Earth and preserve its natural capital is, in essence, to act as a good steward for humanity and all life.
(*Stewardship: "the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one's care.")
(**On the topic of climate change, Santorum has stated that: "[Climate change is] an absolute travesty of scientific research that was motivated by those who, in my opinion, saw this as an opportunity to create a panic and a crisis for government to be able to step in and even more greatly control your life...I for one never bought the hoax." Climate science knowledge here. A future post will further chase the "Environmentalism: government control vs. entrepreneurial opportunity" issue.)
No comments:
Post a Comment