data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c9dc8/c9dc8a8ed1aca2310239378a951c85e336507e05" alt=""
Anyhow I came across this from the Footprint Blog:
Fact No. 1: the human eye can see more shades of green than of any other colour.
Fact No. 2: while there has been little progress in addressing environmental issues, there is now a great deal more awareness of them than a few years ago.
As a result it is not surprising that the green movement is showing increasing signs of splintering, as Paul Kingsnorth's article and blog suggests. Green-ness used to be classified as either light (with a lot of white and prone to green or whitewashing) or dark and somewhat forbidding. Then there is the acid green of those prone to violence in the name of protection. But there is also the blue-green, who put the conservative in conservation, and the red-green (which should really be called brown) who link social issues to environmental concerns. And there is also the question that Paul raises of what it is all for. On this there are the technical greens, who may not even ask the question, as long as there is some environmental benefit. And the spiritual greens, for whom that is the whole point.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dabb1/dabb1089bcf2d82b1dae7da911952c7e616218db" alt=""
I also wanted to acknowledge that Paul Kingsnorth has a lot of important stuff to say in the link above about wilderness
Ah well I'll have to try and write it again sometime but have lost that flow that sometimes comes....and it was probably more interesting for me than you folks out there...
1 comment:
you should write long pieces in a word process and copy-paste into your blog input field.
That's what Shakespeare did.
Post a Comment