Author says challenging simple concepts can save planet

May 29, 2009

Author and democracy activist Frances Moore Lappé says we already know how to solve the pressing issues of our time, such as climate change and world hunger.

But she says our own pre-conceived ideas about how things should work - our mental map of the world - is actually preventing us from taking action.

In a speech at Ottawa's Carleton University as part of the 78th Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, Lappé called for a wholesale revamping of the way we view government, the economy and democracy. If we manage to do it, she says, we can save ourselves from our own demise.

Lappé, made famous in the 1970s by her bestselling vegetarian cookbook Diet for a Small Planet, is an activist, author and co-founder with her daughter Anna Lappé of The Small Planet Institute. She says many people today are frightened by the potential for disaster, ecological and otherwise, and fearful that nothing can be done to prevent it. Lappé says we can do something - if we challenge five assumptions about the way the world works.

The first is that going green means "powering down," or reducing our consumption of . Lappé says all we have to do is stop getting energy from fossil fuels and start getting it from renewable sources like the sun.

"Every day the sun supplies us with 15,000 times the amount of energy we're now using in fossil fuels," she says. If everyone had a solar panel or windmill on their roof, we wouldn't be dependent on oil companies - and as individuals we'd feel more in control of our own destiny.

The second idea to dispense with, she says, is that going green means an end to economic growth. What we have to do, she says, is change our idea of what growth is. Right now, she says, the Walton family - owners of Wal-Mart - controls as much wealth as the bottom 40 per cent of the U.S. population. Is it growth if the wealthy families just get wealthier?

There's plenty of room for growth, she says, if we learn to do things more efficiently. For example, she says various estimates show that between 25 and 50 per cent of all food produced in the United States is wasted. And that every year, Americans throw out some 300 pounds of packaging material.

The third idea she wants to challenge is the notion that humans are by nature greedy, self-centred and materialistic. Under certain conditions, she said, we can be monsters. But there wouldn't be 6.8 billion of us on the planet today if we didn't also have positive qualities such as empathy, cooperation and fairness. As a society, she said we should simply try to make sure our rules try to bring out the best, not the worst in us.

The fourth idea she disputes is that we dislike rules. She says humans crave structure, particularly rules that make sense to us as individuals and which foster a sense of inclusion. We will accept the right rules, she says, citing as an example a German law that enables individual citizens to sell power they produce at home, through renewable sources such windmills or solar panels for example, to utilities at a guaranteed price. People there have embraced the idea, she says.

The final concept she wants to challenge is the idea that our problems are so pressing there's no time for democracy, and only an authoritarian regime can save us. She believes the only hope for the planet is to trust in people and set rules that bring out the best in us.

"The mother of all issues is who makes the decisions," she says, adding that if decisions are taken by people with the most money, we all suffer.

Lappé says she's not against a market economy - just the idea that there's only one way to run the economy.

She also wants to challenge the idea, she says, that change is impossible. Recent history has shown that seemingly insoluble problems have in fact been solved.

"It's not possible to know what's possible."

Source: Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences

2.8 /5 (13 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

Arkaleus
May 29, 2009

Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
"The first is that going green means "powering down," or reducing our consumption of energy."

How do you enforce this? The corollary statement that goes unsaid by greens is:

"To do this we will need authoritiarian governments to enforce rationing and artifical shortages."

No one seems willing to complete the thought here and confront the anti-human, anti-liberty ideology of greens.

The ideology of greens is strongly socialist because of the need for a strong centralized authority to remove the freedom of production and consumption from the people. The more they push this, the greater the chance the people will violently reject them.
Velanarris
May 29, 2009

Rank: 4.7 / 5 (3)
Although I disagree with some of Ms. Lappe's views, she's absolutely correct. Ark, she's challenging the statement of powering down. She's stating that there is no need to reduce energy usage, just the source. My only disagreement with her is the thought process that a single solar setup for each household would satisfy the energy needs of all people. I do see it as a great reduction in fossil fuel usage however, all the energy that falls on Earth from the sun is spread over a large distance, and she's ignoring that to a point. The rest of her message is rather sound.
Grun4it
May 29, 2009

Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Arkaleus, it can't be forced on people. I caution us all from labeling any attempts at solar, hydrogen or wind power generation as green, anti-liberty, anti-human or liberal. These are terms designed to divide us, create fear and offhandedly discount ideas.

It is the ultimate in freedom and patriotism for any country or person to seek to become as self-sufficient in their energy sources as possible, even if it initially costs more. Our current power structure and delivery systems are highly vulnerable to price fixing/fluxuations, foreign control and even terrorist acts. A few years back an unintentional cascading power outage that started in Ohio (USA) blacked out huge sections of the US and even into Canada. This should have been a wake-up call to our vulnerability. What terrorist could easily blow up 1 million or 300 million solar panels as compared disrupting electricity to thousands of homes and business by striking a single point along millions of miles of power lines? How much will one of those events cost us in gross productivity?

Like with all technology, the first units are expensive and suffer from issues. Each generation usually gets better, cheaper, faster and more efficient. Not moving toward alternative energy sources is like IBM in the 1980%u2019s avoiding building on its original PC design because they made more off of selling mainframes. Others moved into fill the gap and built on their idea. No one forces you to buy a computer, but many of us see the value in owning one. There is not one answer, or a final, no-patch or upgrade free solution to these questions. Nor will it be easy.

Ultimately I am just sick of hearing the lame excuses that gas and oil prices are going up because they didn%u2019t think that the winter would be so cold or the summer so hot. There are too many variables in the energy market not to try to find shelter from the storms.
NeilFarbstein
May 29, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
I like her optimistic view of the future.
Hatguy
May 29, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
This debate will go on forever.

Wind farms are having a horrific affect on birds. This then has an impact on insects. This then has and impact on crops and on and on it goes. You can solve one problem, but you create others that you will need to deal with.

It all comes down to education. We need to re-educate both ourselves and our children.

Oh, and as for climate change can someone tell me why Mars and Pluto are heating up? Has our pollution somehow migrated throughout the solar system?

Rod:)
Arkaleus
May 29, 2009

Rank: 2.8 / 5 (6)
I'm guilty of not reading the article carefully, I missed what she was saying. Ms. Lappé is making an admirable argument in favor of innovation. My statement was directed towards the anti-human policies greens are insisting upon.

When you demand that human population be diminished and that people be come poorer, hungrier and have fewer rights, you have left the academic argument and have become a revolutionary. Not even Hitler's new world order delusions demanded such intolerable force be used against human beings.

BTW, this really isn't an ideological argument, there is no left vs right when it comes to nature and the needs of human beings to successfully evolve on this planet.

A deeper argument can be made that the green movement is fundamentally incompatible with liberal western societies, as it requires a central authoriy to force rationing and laws restricting economic activity. When you realize the kind of social control required to realize the green agenda, you will recoil in horror.

Nature will limit our activities naturally, prehaps even catastrophically, but we must accept this and preserve our liberty. We will eventually find equilibrium, nature will adjust, and man will adjust. We don't need people electing themselves into positions to do this for us.

No amount of propaganda or eco-quackery will convince us to surrender our liberty to a tyranny of green socialists with a will to rule for "mother earth".
Velanarris
May 29, 2009

Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Ark, I concur.
moebiex
May 30, 2009

Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
It strikes me that much of her argument revolves around the Adam Smith conjecture that the best way for people to get along is through their pursuit of their enlightened self interest, as opposed to a purely economic self interest. I believe our focus on materialistic goals has seen the transformation of enlightenment into a tool for affecting or facilitating greed. Unfortunately our current economic model hardly recognizes the need to spread the wealth as a means to minimize the envy and associated injustices that culminate eventually in class warfare/terrorism. Ok - it might be a bit of a stretch but with another 4 billion people converging on our modern way of life, Houston- we have a problem. She says open your eyes and honestly evaluate what is happening, how can you not agree with that?
Birger
May 30, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
Arkaleus, you start off with the assumption that future technology will fail to provide the means to solve the problems without draconian measures. Helping hybrid car technology (for example) by initially giving tax benefits to the users is not particularly draconian. But technology need time to mature, and if we wait for various new technologies until "Hubbert's Peak" of energy production has made oil more expensive that other options, then draconian measures may be inevitable. There are other resource problems brewing, but if we act in time, most of them can be overcome without major upheavals.
Incidentally, resource-rich third-world countries have already had more than their share of draconian measures, from the indians who met the conquistadors and onwards. "Blood diamonds" and oil are more current examples. The consumption in the west is not an isolated system.
Velanarris
May 31, 2009

Rank: not rated yet
But technology need time to mature, and if we wait for various new technologies until "Hubbert's Peak" of energy production has made oil more expensive that other options, then draconian measures may be inevitable.
Statements like this are exactly why we left the electric car and went to the petroleum combustion engine. Seeing as that thought process has served us so well so far, I'd recommend you don't say it any longer. Embracing inefficiency creates greater waste than we aim to reduce.
Arkaleus
Jun 01, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Birger:

Actually I do hold a lot of optimism for the future. Humans are dyanamic and clever and when left alone by their governments they come up with all sorts of solutions.

We are at a major crossroads in our civilization, and there's a lot of unprecedented events taking place that we don't have historical references for

There's never been so many humans on earth, and the pressures of population will be the major crisis of the 21st century. We have to patiently WAIT for development to stabilize growth, not call for genocidal depopulation or authoritarian suppression of human life.

Industrial nations have already stabilized their growth, but the third world has not. Undeveloped populations will become developed in the next 100 years, and they too will stabilize. There is a plateau we will hit in the 21st century, and I think we need to plan for that.

The population doom prophets of the 20th century were completely discredited by 2000 and should remind us how to treat charlatans like Al Gore and anyone else who spreads hysteria based on fallacy.

More interesting are the social features of green extremism; it strongly resembles Marxism and demands a command and control economy with permanant "revolutionary" authority to protect us from an environmetal crisis that cannot be allowed to end. Objective science will by necessity be suppressed under such a system, and any study that suggests crisis and emergency rule are unjustified will be suppressed and censored. A green government would be one of the ugliest governments possible, equal to and perhaps beyond that of Stalin, Mao, or the fictional INGSOC of Orwell.

The supression of industry and liberty is exactly the wrong solution if you really need is innovation to solve your problems. The major reason why the population doom prophets of the 1970's and 80's failed was because they could not understand how *free* humans innovate, and the development of new techniques of farming and distribution makes their bell-clanging seem ridiculous today. We live in abundance because we maximize our productivity according to the rules of human nature, and the long experiments in human society support the idea that liberty is the best motivator, not the whips and gulags.

Don't be fooled by the greens, it's the same old argument about command and control vs liberty, and every academic who promotes the tired, old, murderous ways of marxism dressed up in new green clothes needs to be known for what they are.
GrayMouser
Jun 03, 2009

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
But she says our own pre-conceived ideas about how things should work - our mental map of the world - is actually preventing us from taking action.

Yes, let's replace our pre-conceived ideas with her pre-conceived ideas!
What's wrong with this picture? Well, maybe that her pre-conceived ideas are no better than any other person's?
Rank 2.8 /5 (13 votes)
Tags

Related Stories
Relevant PhysicsForums posts
  • Do some geologists actually act a lot like Randy Marsh?
    created22 hours ago
  • Discrepancy between oxygen and carbon-dioxide levels
    createdFeb 09, 2012
  • where gems are found in the world
    createdFeb 09, 2012
  • Wind Waves in Reservoir ~ Wind run-up and Wind set-up
    createdFeb 08, 2012
  • Balance of oxygen in the atmosphere
    createdFeb 01, 2012
  • The case for a methanol-based economy
    createdJan 30, 2012
  • More from Physics Forums - Earth

More news stories

Latin America mining boom clashes with conservation

Latin America is experiencing a mining boom as prices rise fuelled by a hike in global demand, but the region is also being hit by a wave of violent protests, strikes and rallies by environmentalists.

Space & Earth / Environment

created 1 hour ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

Europe stakes billion-dollar bet on new rocket

A pencil-slim rocket is scheduled to lift into space from South America on Monday, carrying a billion-dollar bet that Europe can grab a juicy slice of the market to place satellites in low orbit.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 20 hours ago | popularity 4 / 5 (3) | comments 0

Political leaders play key role in how worried Americans are by climate change: study

More than extreme weather events and the work of scientists, it is national political leaders who influence how much Americans worry about the threat of climate change, new research finds.

Space & Earth / Environment

created Feb 06, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (6) | comments 72

NASA budget will axe Mars deal with Europe: scientists

US President Barack Obama's budget proposal to be submitted next week for 2013 will cut NASA's budget by 20 percent and eliminate a major partnership with Europe on Mars exploration, scientists said Thursday.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created Feb 10, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (3) | comments 54

Humans may have helped the decline of African rainforests 3000 years ago

(PhysOrg.com) -- Large areas of rainforests in Central Africa mysteriously disappeared over three thousand years ago, to be replaced by savannas. The prevailing theory has been that the cause was a change ...

Space & Earth / Environment

created Feb 10, 2012 | popularity 4.1 / 5 (14) | comments 20 | with audio podcast report


Google might launch Drive for cloud storage soon

(PhysOrg.com) -- Google's next big move, according to the Wall Street Journal, is a cloud storage service called Drive. Hardly first to the plate, Google is simply catching up to introducing its cloud reposi ...

Love a click away in Indonesia's Twitter Republic

He was a geeky kid from Yogyakarta, she a glamorous city girl in Jakarta. In a country with one of the world's most vibrant social networking scenes they fell in love on Twitter.

Walney offshore wind farm is world's biggest (for now)

(PhysOrg.com) -- The Walney wind farm on the Irish Sea--characterized by high tides, waves and windy weather--officially opened this week. The farm is treated in the press as a very big deal as the Walney ...

GPS court ruling leaves US phone tracking unclear

A US Supreme Court decision requiring a warrant to place a GPS device on the car of a criminal suspect leaves unresolved the bigger issue of police tracking using mobile phones, legal experts say.

Europeans protest controversial Internet pact

Tens of thousands of people marched in protests in more than a dozen European cities Saturday against a controversial anti-online piracy pact that critics say could curtail Internet freedom.

Study finds that anti-diabetic medication can prevent the long-term effects of maternal obesity

In a study to be presented today at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine's annual meeting, The Pregnancy Meeting, in Dallas, Texas, researchers will report findings that show that short therapy with the anti-diabetic medication ...