| Green and Pleasant |
|
|
| Written by Rabbi Dr. Tony Bayfield | |
| Thursday, 29 November 2007 | |
 I was invited to take part in an evening sponsored by the environmental group ‘One Earth Many Faiths’ at the University Church in Oxford. The main speaker was Jonathan Porritt and he was followed by an interfaith panel. Porritt was tremendous – he speaks brilliantly, is a real master of his subject and he spelled out the extent of the global warming crisis and the urgent need for radical action. I had come prepared with all of the relevant Jewish sources, with confirmation that ResponsAbility regards this as one of if not the cutting edge issue of the 21st century and with support for the pioneering work of Rabbi Jeffrey Newman as British Director of the Earth Charter. But I found myself bursting to say something different. Nobody seemed to be acknowledging the extreme complexity of the issues involved. FairTrade was endorsed. The Sternberg Centre and my house are both FairTrade places. Yet I can’t help worrying about the fact that my FairTrade coffee filters come with more packaging than an Egyptian mummy. Above all, it was the emphasis on self-denial and pain – all the things that make life pleasant and pleasurable must go. I understand and accept that we have become accustomed to growth, to more and more material things and that we have to readjust our thinking. Less not more. But it all began to take on overtones of Puritanism, the hair shirt and the intrinsic value of self-denial. I come out of a tradition, I said, replete with the promise of plenty and embracing the good things of life. It’s clear why governments are so reluctant to be radical – because voters are reluctant to embrace only pain and self-denial. I don’t want to look out of my front window and see a bicycle – it would mean considerable discomfort and great inconvenience. Porritt advocated bicycles and electric cars – but there isn’t an electric car on the market that would have got me to Oxford for the meeting. Porritt talked about population control and I know he is right – but I could not endure without my three children. Do I really have to lower the temperature in my house and get used to wearing thick sweaters? Is it really wrong to look forward to flying to Florida with my grandchildren? The serious point is that we environmental campaigners cannot simply achieve our ends by frightening people into action or by preaching a philosophy of renunciation. We have to root our advocacy in the ethical. We have to find ways of demonstrating to people that acting in an environmentally responsible manner will bring them health, happiness, freedom and give them a real sense of the meaning and purpose of life. We mustn’t play down the urgency. We mustn’t pretend that the choices are anything other than complex and difficult. But we mustn’t offer only pain either. Trackback(0)
Comments
(2)
 written by a guest , November 29, 2007
I think we must change our behavoir for climate protection. That means trying new things that fall outside one's personal comfort zone. Bicycling may prove more enjoyable than you imagine. Reducing one's consumption of meat (and buying from sustainable producers) would reduce carbon emissions (and healthy). Even apparently difficult changes-- i.e. changing our energy infrastructure-- may be easier in the long run than trying to adapt to such climate-induced problems as more intense storms, flooding and diseases.
Yes, you probably should get used to wearing thicker sweaters and lowering your heating down at home (and while you are at it, you should have an energy survey of your house done to make sure it is properly insulated and double-glazed so that you are not heating the outside of your home unnecessarily)and you will be pleased to see your heating bills go down.
Yes, you should really learn the joys of holidaying in Cornwall or the Lake District or Bournemouth or anywhere else that you can get to effectively by train with your grandchildren (and you know what, you may find it a)surprisingly enjoyable and b)far less stressful than an 8-10 hour long plane ride with small children). And no, of the electric cars on the market, none would get you to Oxford and back from the Sternberg Centre, but a bus or a train (combined with a brisk walk and a tube ride) would and you would find that you a) had time to work on the journey if you wanted to and b) you were much less stressed when you got there and c) you probably couldn't overpack your diary with too many things for one person to do in a day. Actually much of what environmental campaigners say is not so terrible or unpleasant. What they are saying is that making a real impact on global warming requires us all (and most particularly those of us in the wealthy West) to rethink not just the details of our lives, but our lives in general. We believe much too readily that we must be always busy, rushing from one place to the next with hardly a break. That means that we must use the quickest form of transport, not the one best for our bodies, our souls or the planet. It means that re-thinking what the good things in life are. You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
|
|
| Last Updated ( Thursday, 29 November 2007 ) |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|