Currents of Faith: Open and Unfolding Reflections

Not since Earth Day 1970 has there been one that bore more promise. 1970 was the year when the American public recognized that the human treatment of the rest of the world was a matter of profound importance. In the following years Congress past significant legislation and Nixon signed it into law. No doubt there were many corporations unhappy about these developments, but their objections were swept aside. In a few years the opponents were better organized. Environmentalists have largely succeeded in protecting the legislation of the Nixon era from serious weakening, but no further advance has been possible. Other nations soon surpassed us, and the United States became the major obstacle to global progress.

Until now! Now there is chance that the long-delayed recognition of global warming will overcome the opposition to progress once again. There is a chance, though no assurance, of a new step forward. I entitled the book I wrote in 1970 “Is It Too Late?” It was already too late for some things then. Today far more of the goodness of the Earth is lost or doomed. It is too late for many more things now. But it is never too late to make some difference.

Only drastic changes will save us from disastrous consequences of global warming. It is unlikely that the opponents of action will permit us to take the needed action. Until the terrible consequences are fully apparent, the American public will probably insist on modest steps. That is all that Al Gore called for in his fine film. These steps will be better than nothing—much better. But those of us who know that they are not nearly enough have the responsibility to build realistic understanding and push for deeper changes.

Deeper changes need not be more sacrificial of what is really good for us. Ending military adventurism and the dream of American imperial rule will not be giving up anything of value, but it is a precondition of constructing a different world. So is reversing the direction from economic globalization to the primacy of the local. The deep changes we need will require greater imagination. Building Soleri’s arcologies instead of more modern cities would not mean sacrifice. Developing agricultural methods that are truly sustainable does not involve sacrifice of any real value. Leapfrogging to truly new technologies would not entail suffering. Our contribution can be a new vision, a real “lure,” even more than warning of the terrible consequences of staying in our current ruts.