Mt. Kilimangarbo

Ten students, two real world excursions, and one dorm tour later, we arrive at the end of week one. It has been an interesting, enlightening experience on so many levels, but perhaps the most critical thing that has occurred is the humanizing of these industries we so readily condemn. Of course, these businesses still represent a significant threat to our planet, but no longer can we demonize them as ambiguous entities without factoring in the human element. I think this is an important issue, so let’s dive a bit more in-depth and analyze the issue at hand.

In the modern age we utilize symbols for many things, recycling, corporations, crosswalks, etc. They provide easily identifiable, quickly digestible information that helps to keep us safe, to streamline processes, and more! But sometimes symbols can oversimplify, they can enforce positive or negative social stigmas that follow the selected party throughout their days, hanging as a shadow, very difficult to shake. This is the situation in which, I believe, corporations find themselves (of course, this is oversimplifying, as well, but this is a 500 word blog, not a doctoral thesis!). We see plants, green, circles as good, rectangles, fire, and large buildings as bad; our minds digest these images and associate them with certain concepts, in this case of environmentalism and corporate industry. This is where my main issue arises, this idea that we are neglecting to consider the things, people, or ideas that comprise these entities is what concerns me.  

We often write off the large businesses because they are these corporate monsters who act on the impulse of money, but we must also consider the good these organizations provide, other than their services or products. They also provide health care, life insurance, dental, vision, etc. and pay to provide for their employees’ families. I’m not claiming to know the exact percentages for projected job growth due to or in spite of recycling (the numbers vary from source to source, with each side having plenty of data, but not necessarily agreed upon by each side), but I just wanted to introduce this other element of the debate, the idea that we are not only responsible for the planet and the persons impacted by extraction, pollution, etc, but also those employed by the waste management companies.   

“If I had it my way, I’d just as soon have all the trash.”

Can we really blame Alan for thinking this way? Of course, he exhibits some cognitive dissonance, knowing that recycling is the right thing, but trash is his business, his livelihood. Those extra tonnes of garbage mean another semester of college for his daughter, another month of the mortgage paid down,  another medical treatment funded. I’m not trying to protect the industry, per say, and I still believe that they have to change, but we have to find a way to ease our society into a new system. I think I agree much more with the people at the IRC now, that we must compromise more readily, that we can’t continue to pursue these radical, outlandish ideas because, as urgently as they are needed, you cannot simply pick up our society and place it on another track, you have to ease it into the station, explain what the hell is happening, and then set off on a new journey.