George W Bush, bless his misguided soul, is not the embodiment of all that is green. You may think that's obvious, given his environmental record, but hear me out. I say this, not because he is an oil-soaked Texan, or because he thinks nuclear energy is renewable, or even because he refused to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol. I say it because he is driven by political expediency. Whatever he thinks in private has no bearing on his political agenda. He is a follower, not a leader, acting on what he perceives to be American public opinion and self-interest. Granted, that's a fault common to most politicians, but Dubya has another more serious shortcoming: he is not a team player in the global schoolyard, but a bully, and therefore will never understand what it means to act in the interest of the global environment.
Green people, by my definition, have heart and passion and a sense of responsibility that guides how they think and act. They instinctively know what is right for the environment and life on earth. Mahatma Gandhi at the beginning of the 20th century may not have known about global warming, acid rain or holes in the ozone layer, but his inner compass guided him to avoid a wasteful, environmentally damaging lifestyle. He was green.
David Suzuki, to provide a modern example, does know about environmental concerns, and he is green because he has been committed to educating Canadians about responsible living since before Al Gore knew anything about politics or the environment. I could probably say that Desmond Tutu is green. I don't know what statements he has made on the environment, but I do know that he is prepared to speak with conviction - even if he comes across as controversial. And he is guided by a strong sense of community and social justice, which means he would probably make appropriate environmental choices.
My point, though, is not that green people know all the answers to pressing environmental questions, but that they are willing to explore the issues honestly and with integrity.
Being green should not be about having the right political agenda. It might require getting involved in political arenas, but that is not, at its core, what being green is about. Politics has a tendency to reduce issues to convenient catchphrases that capture public imagination. Ironically, it's this simplification of complex issues that muddies the water, and I get exasperated when I see people being misinterpreted as they move beyond news-friendly soundbites to explain how they really see things.
I suppose we'll have to live with that, but let's resist the tendency to put personality above character, fame above substance. There's too much at stake to turn environmental policy into a popularity contest. Miss South Carolina understands how to get attention, and no doubt will find a way to turn her instant fame into cash flow. Let's just hope she doesn't decide to promote green maps as the answer to global warming. (If you don't know what I'm talking about, follow the link to the YouTube clip for a good laugh.)
Update on 19 October:
I hadn't seen the latest Time Magazine when I wrote this post, but now I see that they have just issued their special edition on heroes of the environment, with David Suzuki one of a few listed on the cover. Of course they've also got Al Gore in the list, but then it would almost be politically incorrect for Time Magazine not to mention him in the same breath as "environmental heroes". Not that I have a problem with Al Gore, but I'm not so sure about the whole concept of heroes of the environment.
Good one. Wish discussion would replace popularity and hype.
Posted by: D in London ON | 29 October 2007 at 04:03 PM