 On Point Vincent Carroll, editor of the editorial pages, writes his On Point column most weekdays. He is also an author and freelance writer. Reach Vincent Carroll at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com. |
Carroll: Time's goofy green list
Time magazine continues its descent into a parody of the 1970s’ Whole Earth Catalog with its current issue highlighting “The Global Warming Survival Guide.”
To be sure, Time’s list of “51 Things You Can Do to Make a Difference” manages to engage a few serious topics, such as a possible carbon tax vs. the “cap-and-trade” of carbon emissions.
But the list is also chock full of lifestyle suggestions that are trivial, dubious or even silly, and which do nothing but confirm the moral superiority of those who adopt them — in their minds, of course. Each item even includes a rating for its “feel-good factor.”
Time’s feature also confirms that a growing number in the green movement have become latter-day versions of Francis of Assisi, eager to repudiate worldly goods and embrace a life of asceticism — or what passes for asceticism in today’s pampered world.
“Live simply,” Time exhorts. “Meditate. Consume less. Think more. Get to know your neighbors. Borrow when you need to and lend when asked.”
When else would I borrow — when I don’t need to?
There’s much more of this drivel. You should: Mimic UPS by planning your driving routes to “avoid making left turns”; “shut off your computer”; “pay your bills online” (what happened to shutting off my computer?); “remove the tie” (so we can let summer office temperatures drift upward, say, to the 82.4 degrees that Time reports the Japanese government adopted in 2005; can you spell “s-t-i-f-l-i-n-g”?); “move to a high-rise” (sure, right away); “Take Another Look at Vintage Clothes” (Time means secondhand clothes); plant a bamboo fence (don’t ask); and “Ditch the McMansion” gives you a flavor of the various offerings.
Meanwhile, much of the text reeks of snotty condescension. “Think more”? How does Time know how much you and I think? How does it know that “oversize houses” — whatever they are — are “architecturally offensive”? All of them? Are those tiny (Time would probably say “cozy”) 1950s tract homes architectural gems?
Maybe Francis of Assisi was equally annoying when he started his great anti-materialism movement. But at least it included an order of friars dedicated to good works and the welfare of the poor, sick and persecuted. And Francis, bless his heart, never preached a single sermon against left turns.
Prosperity’s calming effect
The syndicated columnist Robert J. Samuelson recently pointed out that “Poor countries won’t sacrifice economic growth — lowering poverty, fostering political stability — to placate the rich world’s global warming fears. Why should they? On a per-person basis, their carbon dioxide emissions are only about one-fifth the level of rich countries.”
Samuelson might have added that economic growth fosters political stability in prosperous countries as well. Does anyone doubt that the quintupling of per capita income in the United States during the 20th century dampened social strife?
So while Time might lament the fact that “in the U.S., big houses are becoming the norm,” it is precisely the prospect of escaping from a tiny bungalow or tenement that helps maintain our civic peace.
Policies that try to force Americans into expensive (per square foot) high-rises are not only of dubious environmental benefit, in the long run they’re political dynamite. “Living simply” might have broad appeal, but its actual practice is best reserved for saints.
Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountain
News.com.
Good article, but you Time magazine left out the part where Enviromental Gods decree that the champions of their cause should be exempt from change. Just ask Al Gore or even the Times editors if they plan on moving to high rise's. You can guess their answer. They are too smart to have to sacrifice. Only the lowly people should have to give their life styles up and live in a fuedal sociaity. They on the other hand need thier oppulant palaces and private jets to spread the word of sacrifice. Time magazine and most of the rags and newspapers wonder why their readership plumets when they tell the little people how to live.
Posted by Ron on April 7, 2007 08:58 PMSo, how then shall we proceed? Are we to continue the suburban/exurban thrust until the water table's depleted and arable agricultural acreage disappears in the name of Carroll's "civic peace?"
Posted by Miles Ahead on April 9, 2007 11:25 AMEveryone's an expert on global warming--Al Gore, Time Magazine, all of our legislators. But no one is listening to the real experts. An excellent response to the Time magazine article can be found in Newsweek International.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek
Prof. of meterology Richard S. Lindzen of MIT puts the issue of global warming in perspective, but it seems people want to hear absolute statements and not conjecture or estimates. The true scientists of climatology admit it's an imperfect science with loads of variables. In studying such a complex system, it's hard to make absolute statements. So the non-scientific alarmists with their non-scientific but absolute conclusions seem to get all the attention.