Lipschutz on Environmental Politics and Social Structure

The perspective offered by Ronnie D. Lipschutz in part of this week's reading is both fresh and engaging; overall, very enjoyable to read. Lipschutz seems to have encountered a problem we talk about in every class period, how to affect social change and what structures are blocking the way...for without social change, we have said in class, global changes benefiting the environment seem like a still-distant dream.

What was most striking about encountering Lipschutz's thesis is that he actually called out our social institutions and structures. While he repeatedly points out that our institutions are not inherently wrong, they are harmful to the environment, even though some of them exist solely to protect and conserve it. It is the capitalist perspective which encourages behavior that becomes harmful and unsustainable and if we are choosing to help the environment and slow its deterioration, we need to rethink how we live our lives on a daily basis.

Lipschutz seems to almost say that while there are a number of environmental threats, one wouldn't have to think twice about them if society hadn't already decided for us that saving the environment was critical to our survival. However, since that is a path that policymakers and citizens have chosen, he begins to explain what social roadblocks exist, and how it is exactly that we continue to fail with environmental reform. It is both a valuable and appreciable goal for Lipschutz to take on the explanation of why none of the proposed solutions have been implemented and then go ahead and point fingers at policymakers.

Still, while I believe that Lipschutz is right in saying that politics and institutions of power block the sensible progression forward into sustainability and conservation, I like his closing points in the chapter better than any. He reminds us that while it is important to remember that each of us is part a larger earthly whole, that we can only experience so much of this Earth at any given time. Thus, the most logical thing to do to start with change is to work on one's local environmental impact (he is supporting the adage think globally, act locally). To take this point one step further, I believe as a student of Political Science, that truly the strongest influence on a politician is an overwhelming cry for change from his or her constituency. All the bribes and lobbyists in the world couldn't take a policy maker's ear away from such a shout (unless they're purely evil and/or consumed by their power). Politicians, especially local ones, owe their jobs and lifestyles to the people the put them in office (at least in this country), so public outrage and action are very good ways of reminding a person in a politically powerful seat of who put them there (not to mention triggering a sincere pang of guilt).