Ideology Behind the Ruthless Exploitation of Nature

Today the Earth faces the great disasters like the pollution of air, water and soil, deforestation, destruction of numerous organic species etc. When we deeply analyze these disasters, we find that there is an ideology, which supports the exploitation of the nature. Today’s man gas devised a principle of self-destruction. His intervention through the techno- logy for the purpose of development often ignores the symbiotic relationship between the human and the nature. Eco-crisis reflects the deep crisis of human society, its set of values and ethos. Our ethi -cs of autonomy is centered on the individual. This human-centered ethics ignores “the essential rela -tionality to nature”.[1] This type of narrow anthro -pocentrism and androcentrism supported an ethos of individualism and placed man as master of all creation. To some extend Christianity and the western anthropocentric thinking supported this ideology.

Western Anthropocentric Thinking
According to traditional ethical approach, our values depend on what is best for the individuals. The basis of ethical discussion was what is best for human interest; i.e.; anthropocentric. This view influences the modern man. The basis of modern man’s ethical discussion is what is best for his interest. Thus he neglected the wish to extend the value given to him to include animals or plants. This change from anthropocentrism as to include the whole universe is what we need today.

Christianity has been widely accused for the continuous destruction of the nature. Those who hold this argument point to the classic expression in the first chapter of the Book of Genesis: “God blessed them saying; be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth” (Gen.1:28). According to them, these words have been taken by Christianity as a license to use and abuse the nature and its resources without being considered of its consequences. Many anti-Christian ecologists take this text as an irritation to “the sensitivities of the kind of ecological consciousness which puts heavy stress on man’s continuity with the rest of nature, to the exclusion of his uniqueness.”[2] Some others would say this expression in the book of Genesis actually, “represents an irreligious attitude in that it fails to treat nature with the sacredness due to it.”[3] Outrageous behaviour during the age of exploration, aggressive colonization and westward expansion in the western history shows that the word “dominion” has served only a negative feeling to exploit natural resources ruthlessly. For the technological man, this passage served as his character to master the nature for his selfish motives.

With regard to Christian approach to environmental ethics; taking an anthropocentric stance is always criticized. Many suggest that Christian approach to environmental ethics needs to be biocentric. It is not only human beings who share the image of God, but also all of creation. It needs to be biocentric because “God loves creation for itself in a way that is not dependent on whether creation is directed towards human benefit.”[4] Our attitude towards creation should one, which is cosmic in approach. There is no place for our interest. In fact, Francis’ approach to the nature was not, of course, a critcal reaction to the biblical account. His attitude toward creation was after all motivated by his biblical and Christian background.

When we consider the Genesis expression of ‘dominion’ what is crucial for us is how this dominion is exercised. Because without understanding the proper meaning of the text in its context, ecological critics often misinterpreted the text. The idea that man is made in the image of God puts “human beings in a unique relationship with God compared with other creatures”. And this relationship gives him a special responsibility to act as stewards or caretakers of creation.”[5] This care-taking role of man is clear from the commands of God to have dominion over creation and subdue the earth. It does not mean exploitation of the nature, rather care of the earth. When one fails in his responsibility as stewards of creation, he fails to nurture the earth. Man is “to extend God’s care for the earth, participating in a continuing creation, an evaluation, which he is to affect by powers delegated to him.”[6] Nature never loses its own created value.

Leonardo Boff in his book “Ecology and Liberation” recalls the original meaning of the text. As he recalls “the human being, man or woman, is a representative of God in creation, his son or daughter, helping to carry our God’s creative work.”[7] One has to understand the terms ‘dominion’ and ‘subdue’ in this context. We, the sons and daughters of God, share in the nature of the Father-creator. Our mission, as Boff says, “not only culminate in creative, in mere responsible representation of God, but in rest on the Sabbath which is celebration made actual in terms of the perfection and goodness of all creation.”[8] Thus at the summit of our mission, we find a joyful co-extensive and not struggle.

But in the modern world, the words ‘dominion’ and ‘subdue’ are taken literally. So the man began to abuse each and every part of the earth. In his thinking, he is the power over the nature. This type of approach resulted in air pollution, water pollution, deforestation, depletion of ozone layer, green house effect, nuclear pollution etc. Our worldview, which is rooted in the ideology of anthropocentrism, underlies the environmental challenges. There fore, coming to the practical issues of the environmental crisis, one can conclude that anthropocentric attitude is unhelpful and potentially damaging. The biblical command to “have dominion” has been taken as a license for dominating on natural world. In this way an anthropocentric Christian approach is partly to blame for the crisis.
[1] S. AROKIASAMY, “Ecological Ethics in a Divided World” pp.484-498.
[2] T.S.DEER, Ecology and Human Liberation, Geneva, 1993, pp.46-47.
[3] Ibid., p. 47.
[4] C.D.DRUMMOND, A Handbook in Theology and Ecology, London, 1996, p.74.
[5] Ibid., p.73.
[6] T.S.DEER, “Ecology and Human Liberation”, p. 47.
[7] L. BOFF, Ecology and Liberation, New York, 1995, p.44.
[8] Ibid.

World View that Destroys the Equilibrium of the Universe

The modern man’s never-ending thirst for the ambitious goal of development through the unbridled approach of the science and technology is the really the cause of the crisis. Today the connection between development and deterior- ation of environment has become increasingly clear. This material worldview of modern man is the result of historical changes, especially the commercial, political and cultural expansion of the west.[1] The constitutive and causative factor of the development- deterioration syndrome, is the materialistic worldview of the 19th century. The Industrial Revolution of 16-17 century, which started in England, which quickly spread to all parts of Europe and America during the 18th century, gave a new impetus for the sources in man’s technological powers over nature. As a result, the mountains could be moved, course of rivers could be changed, gulfs could be bridged etc.

In spite of this, the 19th century systems of thought set by Charles Darwin and Karl Marx gave the Western Europe a new different worldview. This gradually led to a tendency not to believe in the powers of God as preached by the religion. People began to recognize the supremacy of scientism. For them the idea of progress was purely scientific and technological. Thus the science-based technology became the hope of a new life for human kind.

It was this worldview which lies as the root of remorseless destruction of natural world today. Both the capitalism and socialism supported this worldview. The basic to the capitalistic as well as socialistic pattern of economy is a materialist and dichotomy worldview. They considered nature as merely an “object” to be tamed, subdued, conquered and exploited by man. In this worldview, nature is absolutely passive, from which one must resolutely grab, without waiting for its response.[2]

1. Globalization

The globalization, a recent development, on the planet is an irreversible fact. Globalization gives the sense that “all humankind no longer appears as a simple sum total of sovereign states, but as a single social body united by a common destiny.”[3] People, today, are on their way to the formation of a single world society.

Here the relevant question is, how does the process of globalization become a threat to the ecological balance or eco-system? The process of globalization is dominated by economic reality. Leonardo Boff says, “we are in the phase of competitive globalization, which has not yet brought in co-operative globalization because it operates under the rule of capitalist economics and is there fore full of contradictions and conflicts, brought about rivalry.”[4] The global corporations are wedded to a free market economy, which is profit oriented, exploitative and brutal. The global capitalism operating through the international financial institutions and transcendental corporations is the major agency that causes and increases the ecological crisis. The only objective of global powers is the maximum profit-making which is standing as a threat to the health and integrity of the earth’s eco-system. It is the time to think of a different economy or to think of a co-operative globalization and societies in which there is room for all, humans, animals and all living and non-living things. But, today the values that predominate in the society are personal and collective egoism, individual and company profit. We have the obligation to guarantee the future of the Earth system and the conditions in which the future generation and we can continue to live and to develop.

The modern man moves with the spirit of the competition and the triumph of the strongest. In this spirit there is no question of solidarity, participation and sharing. In his material worldview, only man has value. Here differs Francis’ worldview. His worldview did not have a limited sense. He never placed man as the center, in the sense to use and abuse the nature. On the contrary, unlike the modern man, his worldview was so wide that it could recognize the intrinsic value of all creatures.

[1] Cf., J.S.ANA, “The Present Socio-Economic System aas a Cause of Ecological Imbalance and Poverty” in Concilium, 1995/5, 3-10.
[2] Cf., N.SINGH, Economics and the Crisis of Ecology, Delhi, 1976, p.66.
[3] E.CHIVACCI, “A Carefully Hidden Reality”, Cross Currents 50, (Spring), pp.103-111.
[4] L. BOFF, “Life and Death on the Planet Earth”, In Concilium, 1995/5, pp. 1-10.

NEWS: Obama climate policy caught in Democratic tussle

WASHINGTON — A fight within the Democratic Party over control of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee in the House of Representatives could influence the outcome of President-elect Barack Obama's efforts to cap the heat-trapping gases blamed for global warming.
Obama has said he wants to act quickly on climate change, but crucial bipartisan support could be tested if liberal California Rep. Henry Waxman succeeds at unseating Chairman John Dingell of Michigan, the panel's top Democrat for 28 years and a major ally of automakers and electric utilities.
The winner will be at the helm of a panel that will spearhead a bill to cap greenhouse gases and establish a multibillion-dollar market in carbon dioxide, with companies buying and selling rights to pollute.
Last month Dingell and Rep. Rick Boucher, also a Democrat, offered a draft global warming bill based on dozens of hearings and white papers for reducing greenhouse gases by 80 percent by 2050, a reduction in line with what Obama has proposed.
Environmentalists and some liberal Democrats, however, see Dingell as an obstacle to stricter fuel economy standards for cars and trucks and cleaner fuels also advocated by Obama.
They see in Waxman, whose district includes swank and liberal Beverly Hills in Los Angeles, an opportunity to push through a more ambitious environmental agenda now that Democrats have expanded their majorities in Congress and will take over the White House.
"We have lost a tremendous amount of time. Rep. Dingell has always opposed bringing the energy and transportation sectors into a more efficient and modern era," said a senior Democratic aide for a member who supports Waxman's coup. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of challenging Dingell, at 82 the longest serving member in the House and one of its biggest power brokers for a quarter-century.
But Dingell's supporters say his global warming draft legislation has a better chance of winning support from some Republicans and conservative Democrats, many of them on his 57-member committee, because it slowly reduces emissions to buy time for necessary technology to develop.

(AP Published November 8, 2008 11)

NEWS: China tells rich polluting nations to change lifestyle

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said rich nations must abandon their "unsustainable lifestyle" to fight climate change and expand help to poor nations bearing the brunt of worsening droughts and rising sea levels.Wen told the opening of a conference Friday the financial crisis was no reason for rich nations to delay fighting global warming.
"As the global financial crisis spreads and worsens, and the world economy slows down apparently, the international community must not waver in its determination to tackle climate change," Xinhua news agency quoted him as saying.
The two-day meeting is to push China's call for rich nations to fund a huge infusion of greenhouse gas-cutting technology for developing countries. But foreign officials at the meeting raised doubts about Beijing's proposal, which could stoke contention over who pays and how much.
China is widely believed to be the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from industry, power plants and vehicles lifting global temperatures. But Wen threw the onus back on rich nations, with their much higher emissions per person and long history of polluting the air.
"Developed countries shoulder the duty and responsibility to tackle climate change and should alter their unsustainable lifestyle," he told the meeting.
Chinese officials have said wealthy nations should divert as much as 1 percent of their economic worth to paying for clean technology transfers and helping the Third World overcome damage from the rising temperatures bringing more heatwaves and droughts, more powerful storms and rising sea levels.
This would mean a total $284 billion a year if members of the Organization for Cooperation and Economic Development (OECD) paid up based on the size of their economies in 2007.Over 190 nations have agreed to seek a new treaty to curtail greenhouse gases from industry, vehicles and land-clearing. China wants technology aid to feature in that pact, which negotiators hope to seal in Copenhagen late next year. (From: Reuters Published November 7, 2008 )

Causes of the Crisis: Ignorance, inertia & irresponsibility

Our present ecological crisis is due to several possible causes-ignorance, inertia and irrespon-sibility:

1. People were, and in some cases still are, unaware that their exploitation practices would be on a large scale and in the long run detrimen-tal.

2. As a result of former procedures, instituted at a time when a future tragedy would not have been expected, it now is too late or the inertia of the program has become so great that there appears to be little opportunity to reverse a trend.

3. Some people have acted with irresponsibility, preferring to ignore or disregard the balance of nature, the welfare of a species, and the interest of their fellow man for selfish reasons. As a result of modern technological advance, selfish men have had greater opportunity to exploit resources at the expense of others. It seems that we will need the cooperation of science and engineering for the wise exploitation of nature, which includes the animals and plants over which God has given man dominion. Our goal should be to optimize utilization of resources so that no unutilized excess capacity remains beyond that which is required for perpetuation.

Answer to Crisis

The answer to the present crisis lies not in the abandonment of man's God-given prerogative to have dominion over nature. White suggests that man should denounce this doctrine which has provided the climate for modern advance and that man should move toward the heretical position of Francis. The human race would be unwise indeed to abandon its throne; rather it should rule nature wisely, realizing its responsibility to toil for the glory of God.

What can he done now? Firstly, effort should be made to understand the present conditions, whether due to ignorance, inertia or irresponsibility. Each situation will have its own body of data, and proper understanding will require cooperation of many people, including the scientific community. Secondly, education is essential for present and future generations regarding past history, present conditions and advisable future tactics. Thirdly, we should embark on courses leading to active programs which will result in optimal utilization of resources. Fourthly, evangelization should be stressed in order that man properly may relate to God the Creator and to His creation.

Ultimate Needs

With knowledge, active programs and education we may expect to handle pretty well all problems except the nature of man. For this we need the power of God. So evangelization is the primary responsibility of the Christian as an answer to human selfishness. The answer lies not in rejection of one Biblical teaching but rather in acceptance of entire Biblical doctrine.

Mao has acted selfishly not because he wrongly believed that he was the master over the world, but rather because of his own sinful nature. Thus he has put personal interests ahead of God and of his fellow man.

What is needed is the transforming power of Jesus Christ in individual lives. This includes cleansing for sins of selfishness. Also the Bible should he accepted as Cod's revelation. By living with his Christian faith an individual will love God first and other men secondly. With this proper orientation toward God and His revelation man is most likely to exercise wise control over the whole of creation. (The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis, Lynn White, JR )