If Elton John was an environmentalist, he’d rewrite the lyrics to his song as “Sacrifice- just a symbol of love” On the moral compass, sacrifice points to the idea of self-transcendence, in which one sacrifices his or her self-interest for the sake of higher values and commitments. But what or who defines these higher values and commitments?
I remember one day in church, there was this ‘Protect the environment’ kind of sermon! And the priest listed out the cliché aspects of it- recycle, go zero waste, consume less, use public transport, etc! He ended his sermon by saying that it would be hypocritical of him to give real answers and he admitted that he didn’t know much. But what he was certain of- it was going to require sacrifice. The congregation had their heads up and whispers were silenced.
Sacrifice, a word that causes one to feel as if so as to spare the world, you need to surrender your way of life and move into a position of complete distress and misery. Fearing sacrifice, we stick our head in the sea to avoid thoughts of environmental calamity and pretend like we tuned out of it. The idea of setting rules to save the world would be a potential way of imposing our thoughts and ideas into people, refusing them to participate. We are rebellious in nature!
Look around you, do you ever think we’re going to get back to normal any time soon? If anything, COVID-19 showed us, is that: In the past, people lived with an “okay” lifestyle. They settled into “okay” relationships, “okay” jobs, “okay” friends, and an “okay” life. Why? Because “okay” is comfortable. “Okay” provides you with what you need, the essentials, bed to sleep, food to eat, and company. Most people are fine with “okay”, but guess what? That’s “okay”. But honestly, to me, “okay” is not gripping, it isn’t passion, it’s not breathtaking. So, COVID-19 redefines that, the hard way: “I don’t want you’ll to be okay, or normal (literally). I want you to sacrifice today for the promise of a better world tomorrow”. What am I getting at here? Consumerism- the root of all problems and thereby bringing us to the dilemma that, am I going to sacrifice my comfortable, yet unsustainable lifestyle to actually do something for the environment? How far are we willing to sacrifice our ethics to right our wrongs?
Who dictates to us the idea of a better world? (talks as an objector) Leonardo DiCaprio has been trying for ages. Poor guy with his fancy quotes got nothing apart from the French girls! Jane Goodall taught it would be a better idea to teach the apes instead. Lil Dicky tried a song for the generation of today, but man, the beats were so peppy to dance to! We have Greta Thunberg now, but really? She’s only a 17-year-old kid (that’s self-explanatory, right?).
(Okay I’m back!) Yes, agreed! No one can tell you what to do, whether it’s through their wise quotes, talents, songs, and strikes! Love for anything comes from within. And like any relationship, the relationship between humans and the environment is no less! It focuses on the idea that love comes from sacrifice and in the end, it’ll be worth it! Like I said earlier, we’re rebellious, you’re not going to listen if I rant about how to minimize your ecological impact. But as you read this, think! That’s all I ask! Let’s examine our moral compass for a bit!
Is humankind alone significant on the substance of this world? If not, then aren’t our actions proving otherwise? Why is our love and idea of sacrifice species directed? If sustainability revolves around acknowledging the rights of people, what have we been given rights to? Are we using it? And, should we be given it? Think about animal rights! Just because they lack a voice, are they meant to be neglected? Are our future generations entitled to a better environment? In spite of knowing that gasoline runs vehicles leads to the destruction of natural resources, is it right for us to continue manufacturing and using them? Are concepts of environmental ethics just to add fuel to the fire and strike debate?
To be honest, if you’ve asked yourself the above questions, you’ll know what the solutions are. But is that enough? Being the moral police of the environment, we ask them with the hope that there will be answers. Or do we? Most don't, yet the people who do will realize this is rarely conceivable. In every forum about saving the environment, there are pointers presented and hypotheses figured, and potential arrangements established. However, when the opportunity arrives to actualize these recommendations, there is consistently the simple way that is chosen―that of disregarding the environment to yield to the baser needs of man.
Yet, maybe somewhere there is that small niggling feeling that makes us think sometimes, that we all know the theory! Of course, we’ve learned it all in our texts and have seen advertisements that talk of the same. We also know what responsibilities we hold. So, in some way, we do hope! And that’s not bad, is it?
Although here's the real question, are principles of environmental ethics simply one more extravagant term to be included in the growing dictionary for environmentalists or is it going to get us some action?
- By: Richelle D'Souza