Environment: Content from Across the ABC


Date/Time 01 Oct 2014 5:22:31pm
Here are my thoughts. First and foremost, it is important to remember the "different strokes for different folks" saying. Mark is happy living without money, growing his own food, and fending for himself. That is fantastic. Not because it is "right" or because it is "ethical" but because the man is happy.

As Mark states, his way of life is not sustainable for everyone in the modern world. But, I disagree that this is because "we are to addicted to both it and cheap energy". Rather, the vast majority of humans are not invested in environmental activism in the same way Mark is. This has less to do with "addiction" and more to do with priorities. And, these priorities are not necessarily drawn from consumerism either.

Is this wrong? Maybe. Surely, the environment is of paramount importance. But, I can't say other causes are less important... many of them fostered by technology and modernism. Societies are looking for cures to deadly diseases, creating new technology to make the world a more global place, amending social programs to benefit man kind, exc. I would argue that such endeavors are just as beneficial to the betterment of the human race and IT technology and funding from consumerism funds these programs.

Sure, it would be fantastic if the human race could stop wasting food and water, cut down or eliminate pollution, and begin growing and producing more animal conscious foods. It would also be fantastic if the human race could cure diseases like aids and cancer, develop better programs for the mentally ill, and develop better school systems. All of the above are excellent steps forward. The issue is, in order to achieve some goals we need technology and modern thought/economy and in order to achieve other goals we need to divulge from such principles.

It seems to me, the best alternative is to meet somewhere in the middle (or at least attempt to do so). Ghandi may have said "be the change you want to see in the world" but he was also a social activist and a realist. What Mark's doing might be admirable and environmentally friendly but is it sustainable for the human race? And, will it lead to the betterment of our species? I would say no. At least, not in the strict terms Mr. Boyle is holding himself to.

That being said, I feel I must return to my original premise. "Different strokes for different folks". The man is happy, he is doing good for the environment, and he is producing thought provoking philosophy. Moreover, for Mark, this way of life works. But, I wonder what Mark really wants to see in the world? And, whether what he wants to see is a happy medium between consumerism and grass roots living? It seems to me that is what he is hinting at. And, if so, why not preach that ethic?

Regardless, this was a great read and an interesting topic. Mark seems like an excellent human being... far stronger