Jolly Green Problems

To be honest, I am usually not aware of major political decisions that are 'green' or, for that matter, some other shade. My political affiliations regarding the environment are unclear to me because I don't honestly know what a lot of policy on the subject consists of or who is responsible for its existence. But my stance on political issues that I am aware of (although not pertaining to environmental management) is generally a more liberal and democratic one. For me, this means that I tend to value the rights of the individual more than those of the group (however I am uncertain as to how this mentality will hold up with issues of the environment). For example, my very basic understanding of the Patriot Act left me feeling upset that individual freedoms to privacy were being violated by government officials. Other typically defining issues such as same-sex marriage and the death penalty also demonstrate a more democratically charged ideology--'for' and 'against' respectively. Much of this, as we mentioned in class, is certainly due, in part, to my own parents' ideologies (which mirror my own in these examples).
My economic perspective of things (broad though it is not) tends to also be more liberally inclined. By this I mean that larger economic issues at hand like socialized health-care make me say "Hell yeah!", but only because it seems like a good idea, not because I know the specific economic outcomes of such a financially demanding program. My economic view on health-care is driven by a very un-econmic idea that those in need who cannot help themselves, should be helped, and I suppose I don't think much further than that.

When initially enrolling in this course, I did not foresee a lot of opportunities for an ecocentric view of the environment to conflict with my upbringing. I figured that buying clothes made from grass and soybeans while simultaneously not dumping buckets of box-fans and computer parts into the ocean would not mutually exclude my previous liberal sentiments. However, I am quickly seeing that things are not quite that simple.
From the various environmental philosophies that we have covered in assigned readings and class, I feel a certain want to have an ecocentric or holistic view of the environment. It seems admirable and poetic even to feel this sort of Captain-Planet-connection with the world and its smorgasbord of life as equal beings and parts of a whole unit. But I can't stop myself from thinking that saving a baby instead of a head of lettuce or platypus is a good idea. Every time. All of the time. That said, I suppose that my feelings towards the environment come second to human life. However, I also realize that human survival is dependant on an environment that functions similarly to the way it does today. So even if our investments are based in the human race's existence, our interactions with the environment have implications for future generations of human life. For example, respect for the ozone layer can very easily be manifested in the helpful duties that the ozone layer undertakes in order to keep humans safe, like filtering the sun's rays so that humans aren't all zapped with cancer and super-peely skin (although, to be fair, both of these conditions still exist, albeit at a much slower rate). Not that prolonging the human race is the only reason for not wanting to destroy the ozone. I'm sure that there is some seriously beautiful scientific shit going on with those UV rays that some people understand and love and would hate to see destroyed.

For this reason I am uncertain about a purely anthropocentric philosophy if it is one that only takes humans into account at the present. The Cornucopian theory that banks itself on human intuition and miraculous scientific discovery is not only ludicrous, but also allows for an extremely large burden to be lifted, heaved, and dropped on the shoulders of a nameless future. Believing in equality in the present should not exclude an attempt to provide the same for the future. That said, I do not agree with an over-investment in the human race's power to thrive at the expense of the environment because of the implications these changes may or will have for future generations to come. Although it is easy to be caught up in the 'here' and 'now' of the moment, I am hopeful that careful consideration of our past's involvement in our own existence will drive us to be more thoughtful and compassionate about the sort of world we leave behind for those next in line.