Sustainability’s Security Imperative
Alex Steffen of WorldChanging tries to get at what should be the “green world’s” vector of approach for the average consumer – the individual security imperative – but gets mired up in discussing the negative effects of not sustaining by repeating the same long term broad minded speeches the ecocrowd is known for:
The health effects of sprawl, car accidents, chemical spills, environmentally-influenced cancers: all of these things are probably bigger threats to the lives of average Americans than terrorism. Certainly preventable disease, unneccessary hunger, solvable poverty and environmental degredation already cause far more death and suffering in the world than any terrorists ever could.
He should have dropped the moral imperative, built off of Robb’s vision (which he’s making a reality for him and his – which doesn’t portend well for the rest of us) of systemic failures amid collapsing states.
Bottom line – instead of dismissing the wave of paranoia and pushing for a change in threat targeting (terrorism isn’t real, global warming is), the go-green movement should be riding it and capitalizing on it. (Terrorism is the threat, resiliency through sustainability is the answer.)
-Shlok
Sign up for my newsletter.