Is Being Green A Middle Class Indulgence? , 21°

Peter D. 64°

Interesting article in The Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/column...

"Julie Burchill can't stand them. According to her new book, Not in my Name: A Compendium of Modern Hypocrisy, she thinks all environmentalists are po-faced, unsexy, public school alumni who drivel on about the end of the world because they don't want the working classes to have any fun, go on foreign holidays or buy cheap clothes."

21 replies

The greenest living people that I know are rural dwelling African people that lead a subsistence agriculture life.

They live in wattle and daub houses made of mud, saplings and thatch. These houses will degrade back to their natural state (pile of mud and rotted sticks) within a few years if left unmaintained. Using saplings mean that the wood component is quickly regenerated new growth so the impact is very low.

These people hand-till all their own land and raise 90% of their own food by their own hands. They trade some for other products/services.

They don't have cars, running water, electricity, bank accounts, telephone or internet.

They catch their own fish (by hook and line) and raise some grass fed sheep and cattle. They have some chickens that are fed on scraps and that eat bugs (natural pest control).

Water mainly comes from springs (gathered by bucket).

They do use a small amount of kerosene for lighting.

So yes, it is possible to be very green and not have to be middle class or indulgent.

Written in August

C Robb W. 395°

But are they sexy? Apparently that is important to Ms. Burchill.

Written in August

Harald K. 30°

Her wikipedia page is rather interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Burchill

Seems she has built quite a career on offending people. I wouldn't pay her any attention.

Written in August

Is Ms Burchill sexy? Not that I really care...

Written in August

Peter D. 64°

>>are rural dwelling African people that lead a subsistence agriculture life.

But would they choose a different way if they could?

I suspect the article is getting at the class divide in western countries. Being environmentally friendly can sometimes mean higher costs i.e. organics.

Written in August

I think people with time on their hands usually are middle class and it is good that the middle class thinks about alternatives to the way society is going rather than watching Britney Spears or whomever. For myself - yes middleclass
I am interested in the car of the future, which will have to adapt to a range of fuels sources. Depending on the geography car companies will have to be regional and respond to the fuels sources available. There is no one size fits all anymore - like the internal combustion engine. There will be methanol, ethanol, bio-diesel, natural gas, electric, hybrid electric petrol cars, hydrogen and within hydrogen liquid or compressed gas.

This is the challenge there is no clear winner in the car fuel source stakes, basically because there is no free lunch. All fuels sources have environmental impacts because human beings make impacts on nature whatever they do, It is a question of lesser impacts.

I hope this is of interest to you. Kind regards

Karlamanda Bell
www.ghgblog.com

Written in August

Peter D. 64°

Welcome Karlamanda :)

Written in August

C Robb W. 395°

Please take no offense Karlamanda, but having the luxury to be concerned about the car of the future is a perfect example of a middle class indulgence and denies the core of the issue. Being truly green will mean a complete restructuring of our lifestyles, the consumerist debt based economy along with the luxuries that both depend on and facilitate it will have to disappear. As an example of an economy that has already made many of the changes heading our way and handled them elegantly and with a high degree of social justice look at Cuba since the special period.

Having said that, there will need to be a time of transition in the developed world and as the numbers of cars is reduced there will still be a lingering market for them and they should be zero emission or as close to it as possible. My personal preference is toward solar/wind charged electric cars re-manufactured onto existing vehicles. I don't believe we can afford the continued industrial production of consumer goods purchased on debt unless they lead directly to a reduction of GHG emissions.

Written in August

Peter D. 64°

>>high degree of social justice look at Cuba

Sure about that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Cuba

I doubt the world will abandon cars. The desire for personal transport has been with us since we took to riding horses. The power-plant of the car may change, but we'll still have cars.

Written in August

C Robb W. 395°

You are certainly free to doubt it Peter, as for me I plan to sit back an watch it happen. If I can help communities free themselves from the strangling effects of "auto" immune deficiency I will. Certainly there are likely to be some left as there are likely to be some who have enough disposable income to waste it in such a fashion. As the effects of peak oil, climate change, and the crash of the petro dollar accumulate, more and more people will have less and less disposable income, economies will become local and the need for cars will drop off.
Cars will become a luxury, as will supporting a large class of elites who profit from poverty by forcing the current economic model down our throats. At least one can only hope. :-)

As for Cuba, I value universal health care of a quality as high as anywhere in the world, which is to be found in Cuba not in the US. A committment to feed it's people with healthy organic food, provide mass transportation, increased access to higher education, affordable housing, and the opportunity to be free from consumerism is the hallmark of a country with social justice as a priority. Compare that to the US which is committed to corporate profit first and foremost and through this commitment would rather foreclose on peoples houses and subsidise the industries that drive them into poverty, disallow the formation of workers unions, has a higher infant mortality rate than 33 other countries in the world, not only actively markets unhealthy products to children but gives corporations a tax break for doing so, subsidises the very industries that are bringing about the destruction the eco sphere that all social justice relies on while doing everything it can to hinder the development of industries that might offer us a way to forestall this calamity.
Whew.... let just catch my breath.
Rant over.

Written in August

1 person thinks this is a cool reply

« Prev | Page 1 of 2 | Next »

Featured Companies & Orgs 

Pledge to do these related actions

Barack! Choose a coal-free VP!, 80°

Gore has "pushed the reset button" on our thinking re climate and energy. First step ...

Fight Voter Suppression!, 21°

Concise guide on early voting and what to do if you have a problem at ...

Follow these related projects

Food for Change

Global, New Zealand

Media information on line

Melbourne, Australia