What’s love got to do with it?

The Mainstream Green article attempts to bridge the gap between the relative importance people place on sustainability and their actions.  How do you best target your message so as to maximize impact and turn ambivalence into action?  Bennett, Graceann and Williams suggest a number of approaches chief among them: “tapping into a pre-existing source of pleasure;” making green behaviours normal; and making green behaviour the default.  All novel approaches based in values, both intrinsic and extrinsic.  My next sentence was going to start with “however,”and then proceed to speak to the superficial nature of this type of messaging, but I don’t think it’s the time to be looking for a magic bullet capable of shifting global values with one really powerful massaging technique.  The Futerra report speaks to the need for love to be the centerpiece of conservation messaging, and who am I to disagree.  Change needs to come from all directions.

Maybe I do take issue with the normal campaign. When has being “normal” ever achieved anything for anyone or any cause?  The thinkers and causes that have managed to shift paradigms in the past were never considered “normal.”  No one really wants to be normal or generic.  Although I suppose there is a degree of wanting to be just normal enough not to stand out too much, but still hold on to the idea that we are unique and special.  I might be coming full circle here, as I guess it’s fair to say that while the neo-liberal paradigm has contributed to our sense of individual freedom, it has simultaneously created an individual sense of entitlement, entitlement that makes it difficult to divest of ourselves of consumer driven actions, and invest (emotionally & financially) in a new paradigm.

Today in class a debate emerged over whether or not to make corporate and political institutions the target of our anger and frustration, or are they merely reacting to public opinion and market demand out of a misguided sense of duty? There are no absolute answers to these questions, but a plethora of approaches can’t hurt.  Luke Skywalker (I would be remiss if I failed to make at least one pop-culture reference in my final blog) didn’t enter the Death Star alone.  He would have never been able to release his proton torpedo’s into the heart of the Death Star had it not been for the efforts of his wingmen (and “the force”).  We need people working simultaneously at the systemic and individual levels.  If people sense that change is possible at a political or structural level they might feel a little less disenfranchised.  At the same time the governments and corporations who control international policy need to be aware of change emerging from the bottom-up.  I’m unsure as to what the future holds, but there is no doubt that a shift is coming, and unlikely in a time frame that we are comfortable with.  If people want to remain optimistic about the future they need to free themselves of the constraints to change that western culture has deemed to be the aspirations of all.   What should our aspirations be centered on?  Love is as good a place to start as any.