Response to Maniates Article

Maniates brings up a number of valid points in his attempt to start getting people to make drastic decisions to their lives in the name of the environment. Following the 3 R's [Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle] and trying to cut back on energy usage on an individual level alone is not enough. We, as a country, need to change some of the basic tenets of our society. Consumerism and the American way of life, which includes the dream of a big suburban house and a few cars, are not sustainable in the long run given the number of people on the planet, our current methods of production, and the limited resources of the planet. 

However, the small steps that Maniates denounces as easy and not enough are about as far as many people can go in reducing harm to the environment. This is not because people are lazy or don't care, but because it is hard to think about people decades from now when life seems difficult now. Given the current worldwide economic slowdown, most people are more concerned about their jobs or living expenses than their carbon emissions. In times like these, small steps are better than no steps at all. 

Granted, the very institutions that can try to help people do more, like the government and all of its associated departments and agencies, are not helping, much like Maniates says. The EPA, for instance, fought California's attempt to set lower emissions targets than the EPA. We are living in a crazy world when the Environmental Protection Agency is stopping a state from doing all it can to protect the environment. It is much like the video "The Story of Stuff" by Annie Leonard says; the government seems more interested in protecting the vested interests of corporations and businesses than of people. If the government tried dramatically change this country in an attempt to reduce our impact on the environment, and reverse it, not just within our borders but by reducing the impact Americans have in other countries via industries, businesses would be impacted greatly. 

Our economy is based on the idea that producing junk that people buy and need to replace often will make you wealthy. Change this model and businesses will shrink, which I doubt they want and they have the money to prevent the government from interfering with this model. Citizens don't. We do have the ability to attempt to hold the government accountable, by voting and agitating for change. Of course, a popular figure to become a face for this movement and to help people care about the environment, like Dr. King did for the Civil Rights Movement or FDR for the war effort would help. 

I agree with Maniates when he says that people are, to an extent, willing to sacrifice to help the planet, but I think it is businesses that will probably end up sacrificing more than the common person.