by Jim Gilliam

Planet Abuse

One of the big problems in building a movement is trying to get people to do “less” of something. If it’s morally wrong, you shouldn’t just do less of it, you shouldn’t do it at all! Without the moral clarity of “murder is wrong,” people just keep doing what they’re doing.

This is a big problem for issues like climate change, rampant consumerism, pollution, trash, etc. “Pollute less” or “buy less” simply isn’t cutting it.

These issues need to be framed into one thing that eventually everyone can agree is bad. Planet abuse.

This has been done before. Child abuse. It wasn’t always a bad thing, but today many things, like striking a child in anger are widely regarded as wrong. Very few think kids should be forced to work. However, there is controversy on spanking children, and the age line of what constitutes molesting a child keeps moving. But if you ask someone “is child abuse wrong?” 100% will say yes.

If we started to talk about “planet abuse” we could eventually get a lot of people to agree that it is wrong, and then we can fight to define exactly what planet abuse is. Some things will be clear, and others will be murky and change over time. “You can’t do that, it’s planet abuse!”

I just googled this phrase, and apparently it’s never been used before. Let’s change that.

This came out of a discussion with Aaron Swartz.

  • The planet has been suffering in silence for centuries but there is evidence it is now fighting back. Would'nt we all if we were subjected to the same? Like us, the planet also is alive. Why do we forget that? When the body gets inundated by illnesses, it succumbs and finally stops all function. What choice does our planet have??
  • Excellent post, corporations that contaminate the environment should be targeted first and foremost!
  • I think its a good idea to have a big picture, issue is that while some of the stuff will be very valid, there is a lot of flummery too and that risks undermining the whole effort. (For example I think the OTT AGW stuff will hurt - and possibly sweep away - a lot of the very good work done on base Climate Change.

    Don't have an easy answer though :-(

    However, I think this is where the Scientific method was worked before, so long as it has been allowed to work properly.
  • I like it, but I'm afraid it will be sticky only among those who don't need convincing. It sounds like an accusation, not an alarm. "Sustainability" has been an important word because it serves as a warning, "abuse" sounds like finger-waving.

    The real challenge is to find a metaphor that evokes images of self-harm. What story might Sarah Palin know that speaks of unsustainable consumption?

    Maybe it's "shitting in your own planet". ;-)
blog comments powered by Disqus

About this blog

Jim Gilliam is a geeky activist building internet tools to shake up a broken political system.

Subscribe

Contact

Jim can be reached at or Twitter.