Riding your bike to work and changing your light bulbs may make you feel like you’re a part of the solution, but you’re not really making a difference. No matter how many of us stop driving gas guzzlers, swap out our incandescents and eat local, we still face the construction of 850 new coal plants in the US, China and India.
It’s time for progressives to stop washing their hands of politics by “being the change they seek” and turn up the heat on decision makers in Congress and the industries responsible for this civilizational emergency.
Focus the Nation is mobilizing millions of students, educators and citizens across the country in a day of education and civic engagement on global warming. We aren’t asking anyone to promise to join a carpool or turn down the thermostat. We’re challenging you all to educate each other and yourselves on global warming solutions, take that knowledge to the people in charge and demand action.
If you aren’t already working on Focus the Nation, its time to start. We’ve got ten weeks left before the biggest day of civic engagement on global warming ever on January 31st.
If you’re on a campus, find out who’s organizing at your school. If your school still isn’t signed up, take the initiative yourself. If you aren’t a student, then sign up your household, organization, business or faith group for a showing of the 2% Solution web cast with Van Jones.
Don’t ditch your cruiser just yet. We’ve got a long ride ahead of us, and we all need to start pedaling a whole lot harder.
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
Your words are frank, perhaps discomforting for many…and true.
thanks for keeping things in perspective. i’m not one myself to harp on people to switch personal habits even though i support them. in the grand scheme of things, i think organizing to make institutional change is more strategic and will have a deeper impact. unfortunately it’s sometimes hard to get this perspective through to some folks in a culture that more often than not emphasizes individualism over collectivism.
Just to be clear, I don’t think Alex was saying that it’s an either-or proposition: either you work to make your lifestyle more sustainable OR you work for broader institutional/policy changes.
The point is that we need change on all levels - individual, community, society, institutional, policy, etc. - and that anyone who thinks they’ve “done their part” and “washes their hands” of the problem after simply changing a few lightbulbs and working on just one of those levels is selling themselves - and our planet - short.
To expand upon that point, here’s how we put it in the Cascade Climate Declaration, which I helped author:
“We recognize that this transition [to a sustainable, just, and prosperous energy future] will require change at both the individual and societal levels, and are committed to working towards both.
…
We call on all generations to join with us in helping to launch the institutional changes that we are already beginning to make as individuals, communities, and campuses.”
Or from a speech I delivered recently:
After describing a vision of a sustainable, just, and prosperous future…
“We can make this future a reality, if we act today to begin a rapid and equitable transition to clean, renewable and local energy sources. This is our urgent opportunity, one that we have the ingenuity, hope and determination to seize.
Many of us have begun to rise to the climate challenge and begin this transition to a sustainable energy future – in our cities, our communities of faith, on or campuses and in our homes.
That is why, today, we come here to call on our elected officials to join with us to be leaders in the fight for a brighter tomorrow. Today we call on [our elected officials] to help us launch the institutional and policy changes that we have already begun to make, as individuals and communities.” [emphasis added]
i find the use of the phrase “civilizational emergency” quite interesting. are we seeking to save civilization? perhaps civilization itself is part of the problem and should be “phased out”?
Thank you for re-emphasizing that this is not an “either-or” issue. Change must occur on all levels. The collection of personal habits contribute at least as much to global warming as do the coal plants…after-all, companies wouldn’t build more coal plants if there wasn’t a huge demand for power.
Yes angeline, but Alex’s point is that we don’t have the time to simply work to reduce our contribution to the problem and then “wash our hands” of it, feeling comfortable that we’ve done our part.
For those committed to ending the climate crisis and building a sustainable, just, and prosperous future, simply not being part of the problem is not enough. It’s a necessary, but not sufficient step. Alex’s point (I believe) is that we’ve got to do more to achieve the societal and institutional changes needed to solve the climate crisis quickly enough, and that takes more than just changing some lightbulbs or buying green power.
So yes, it’s not either-or, it’s both-and!
Thanks Jesse, you’ve got it spot-on.
The marginal impact of our individual decisions is very small. The marginal impact of policy changes is very significant. Changing light bulbs, etc. doesn’t take a whole lot of our time and effort, so it is not either-or.
However, in many cases making personal changes does achieve the psychological effect of having done something, in many cases allowing a would-be climate activist to get back to business-as-usual.
The shame is when one’s energy goes in to convincing other individuals to consume more responsibly instead of working to change elections and policy. This problem is too urgent to take our sights off of big changes in the chambers of Congress and corporate boardrooms.
Let’s make sure the climate movement does not aim too low and hit.