I read a lot of scorn for environmentalists, specifically on popular blogs I bump in to, folks involved in social networking sites and things of that nature. It's rare that I ever rant beyond the confines of my own blog- I don't need to press my views upon other people, it just isn't necessary and can often create tension instead of active participation on behalf of casual observers. Global Warming is a topic of fierce debate in our society. For example ... I'm a frequenter of Myspace, that's a given, and as a result I'm privy to some great causes on the enviromental side of things as well as sites dedicated strictly to humor. One of the humor sites I really enjoy is the Myspace Awards Center [MYSAC], in conjunction with www.mikeink.com. The owner- Mike, go figure- created some posting tags in regards to the environment. They're a bit counter to the argument, if you will. Here's an example:
[Please note, HTML code did not transfer. To view examples, please see www.myspace.com/myspaceawardscenter.]
I'm not entirely sure that this example will be transferable to a blog, but I might be able to figure the html code myself later. Regardless, all of the comments are "anti" environmentalism. That and they're kind of funny. What good is life if you can't take advantage of laughing at yourself? I'm guilty of letting my passions get the better of me- such insistance on my part has spurred a lot of my peers into action and for that I'm glad. Beyond that, I run the risk of sounding preachy. No one likes a nag.
Well, I guess Mike got a few nasty comments from the environmentalists that frequent his page. I chuckled to myself, though I don't even know who I would post the comments to. Mike got fired up and then fired back and he made a valid point in regards to people being vicious when certain causes are concerned. Mike likes to see what it takes to get people fuming. He's fairly good at it.
The point of this particular blog is to speak to my fellow Earth Warriors:
Are we really that snarky? Are we a bunch of tight wads? Is an eco-marxist method the best way to work people into action? There's a fair amount of folks in the world that aren't the least bit interested in what we have to say- many of them work urgently to prove us wrong and make us out to look like fanatical planetory-jihadists, if you'll pardon the expression. When we get all fired up and angry, we fuel that fire.
Sometimes, I feel my face get hot. Sometimes I want to reach through my monitor and shake some sense into whatever ignorant pontificator declairs that Global Warming is a hoax. And then I tell myself, "Calm down, Say. It aint all that bad. There are folks doing the work to get the problem taken care of. The strong few will save the many with mob mentality."
So, to get back to my example, Mike got chewed out, he lettered a decent response, his loyal network of fans ran to his aid- they fired off plenty of anti-environmental sentiment and though I do believe that many of them understand the urgency facing our planet ... the ball got rolling and the conversation started to turn nasty.
I guess I really just want some feed back on this. Do we scream out in protest? Do we risk frightening those new to the cause? Do we risk alienating ourselves?
How can we best conduct ourselves to keep our sense of humor, charm and wit, thus undoubtedly influencing our peers to see that though we can poke fun at the problem, the main objective must still remain in sight.
Any and all comments are more than welcome. Are you slow to conversion, a person who still chuckles at your friends that refuse to throw away plastic, glass and aluminum? What do you say to your environmentalist friends when they harp on you? What should they say instead?
Understanding a proper method of persuasion is the best way to gain cooperation.
More flies with honey, Honey.
More soon.
Love,
Say
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Bah! I started writing a response to this, but then it was starting to rival the word count of the article, which is just ridiculous.
Brass tax: A lot of environmentalists come off sounding like fundamentalists and no one likes a fundy. It often feels that if you oppose the idea of global warming (I don't), someone wants to hold a sword to your neck as if it were the crusades. Also, Al Gore was the worst/best thing that happened to global warming. Just by being a democratic politician, he instantly polarizes his audience and sadly, "An Inconvenient Truth" would have been better coming out of Bush's mouth.
Dan- you always leave the best insight. I totally agree on the creepy fundamentalist thing. No one likes it and no one wants it. That's why people hide when religious fanatics knock on their front doors to hand out leaflets.
There's a meeting in Paris today (April 17) to discuss the impact of industrialized nations on the world's climate. Bush has a horrible approach to the whole thing ... making the US the only country to maintain current emissions levels until 2017.
::sigh::
What a different country we would be if "An Inconvenient Truth" had come out of his mouth.
Post a Comment