|
|
|
|
|
|
Description
(1) With the current state of the world, sometimes it can be all too convenient to lump different peoples into one group. For instance, occasionally we hear about a parking lot full of SUVs or a street's worth of luxury homes going up in smoke due to a group of miscreants. Environmental terrorism has entered our vernacular. It's too bad this has occurred, because thousands of people around the world devote their time, and sometimes their entire livelihood to defending nature. A very small group of people, who gain short mention on the news network but no long term gains. Working within the confines of a democracy is what separates us from dangerous fanatics who use last resort tactics. (2) A more devious group of scientists bring out the best in outdated and incorrectly interpreted sources for their journalistic endeavors. Many of their works are funded by companies and think tanks, who have a deeply financial reason to downplay any published material that prove their products harm the environment. Look through the biography of authors and publishers you may not be sure of. It is unfortunate that anything can be published in mass, so long as money can be made. (3) Another major myth about environmentalism is that it is led by middle-class, well-to-do persons who are more concerned about practically unknown species, and not about the people who are affected by an environment decimated by corporate greed. This is an absurd observation. I'm not sure one could find a more diverse group than you would find at an environmental cleanup or rally. Environment degradation unfortunately is almost always intertwined in a lower-class area of cities. Over time, companies that are efficient at creating pollution slowly move into a neighborhood that most likely will not speak up, usually a lesser-income area, and the company sits securely in this haven for years before the carcinogenic affects begin to take place. When environmentalists speak up, they are not only speaking up for everyone and everything downstream, they also find themselves empowering the people who have lived amongst this pollution for years. What is good for one segment of the population is good for all people. (4) The argument of economy versus the environment is always thrown on the table during a debate. What's worse, a world with no resources left and lots of money to buy what little is left, or middle of the road plan with some open space to visit, and a sustainable infrastructure. The plight unfortunately depends on decisions made by the US Executive Branch, who likes to use Neanderthal tact little long-term forethought. The economic benefits of making a sustainable infrastructure is astounding. As a country, we could save billions of dollars on just energy savings alone, never mind getting our beloved troops home to their families where they belong. Making all products recyclable would take a huge burden off the land we use as a dump. Instead of inventing tens-of-thousands of chemicals to spread around the food chain (which incidentally accumulates at the top - humans!), we should focus on organic means to feed the human population, among other things. Typically, what is good for the environment is good for the bottom line. (5) Please read this page on Myths about Environmentalism and Environmentalists for some more myths about our public lands. One last myth (there are others) is that only the professionals get involved with politics of fighting for the environment. In the United States, we all have the opportunity to have the ear of our elected leaders. For a few brief minutes, you could hold the attention the Honorable Her or Him and tell them what We the People want, not what the corporate dogs whisper while slipping money into next year's campaign coffer.
Myths and Facts about the Endangered Species Act Myths about the Ozone depletion Myths spread by anti-Environmentalists (good site) Helpful Reports The Latest Myths about Climate Change (by Environmental Defense) Helpful Books
|
