Trinity of Despair

I think that Professor Maniates’ ‘trinity of despair’ is effective in identifying problems with the environmental movement (or any movement, for that matter) and that I really agree with his viewpoint. The first part of the trinity makes the assumption that people are selfish, and out for only themselves. This is true, if it is what you are looking for. I feel that this assumption depends on an individuals’ own outlook on things. For example, while I was working at Greenpeace, the workers and volunteers there honestly believed that social change could be brought about through public awareness of a problem. I believe that this is true, and it can be seen through the Civil Rights Movement. If organizations like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, etc. all believed that people were inherently selfish; then most of their work in the public sector would not be effective and the foundation of their organization would basically break down. If an individual wants to look at the world in a way that assumes all people are inherently selfish, then that is what one will find. You can basically find anything if you look hard enough, but I think it’s important to focus on positive things to look at, instead of negative assumptions about people that already put a damper on your view of individuals.

The ES (Environmental Strategy or Easy Stuff) also has an element of assumption. I think it’s necessary to look at how people respond to initiatives that make things easy. Personally, I don’t like being targeted with easy goals and strategies. I think a part of human nature is accepting challenges, and that by always giving individuals an easy way out such as changing light bulbs, nothing is really getting done. Their motions are so simplistic, that there is no thought process going on behind their actions. I think that it is way more important to challenge people with hard goals so that people actually feel some sort of emotion, whether it’s positive or negative, but still get the challenge completed. I think that a better assumption that Professor Maniates spoke about in our video conference would be that people generally face challenges more than they face easy stuff, and that element of human nature is what should be targeted.

Last, there are problems with social change. I do not think it is necessary to get everyone on board with an initiative before it is put in place. An example of this is in Washington State along Puget Sound. A city (I’m completely blanking on the name) decided that it was necessary to stop residential growth in their area, and made an ordinance for all property owners with undeveloped land at the time to keep 65% of that undeveloped land as it is. Sure, this is a real issue with some people because it is their land. However, in the long run, the local lake, which flows to the Suquamish River, which flows into Puget Sound, will not get the contamination from surface and storm water runoff because there is undeveloped land that the water can flow into and recharge. Individuals right now, especially in Congress where most laws get created and put into effect, are too divided. I think that a mechanism that puts the necessary laws in place by looking at science is what is needed for change to be made. Yeah, this might sound a bit socialist, but we’re not getting anywhere with our current goal of making EVERYone aware of environmental issues and trying to get everyone we can to advocate for change. This is effective, but many of these environmental issues are time-sensitive, and we do not have the time to waste on extensive public acceptance because at this rate, it is never going to happen.

I'm not sure if this take on the 'trinity of despair' is exactly what Professor Maniates has in mind, but I do think that it is a good basis to start a movement and help others understand the point of a movement, and how it can affect change. I think that Professor Maniates view of the environmental movement is innovative and needs to be acknowledged on a larger scale. I also feel that this model can be applied to many different types of social movements.