Nations Of The World example essay topic

A new era of change is upon us. There now exists a movement that attempts to create a sustainable environment. The question remains how to go about this task. The film, an Inconvenient Truth has proposed that our old habits plus our old technologies have resulted in environmental damage. It further stated that by switching to new technologies we could avert or reduce the effects of global warming before environmental damage reaches catastrophic proportions.

At this stage in the climate change situation, denial of global warming is no longer valid. A new idea has surfaced, the idea of eco-capitalism. It applies the base ideas of capitalism to the environment. The environment then becomes a business opportunity. The core belief of eco-capitalism is a continued exploitation of the starving nations, while maintaining a claim that a concerted effort against climate change will benefit everyone.

The benefit will of course be much greater for those in the west and will make little difference for those who live anywhere else. The real solution being suggested by the eco-capitalists should be equated as such: Old habits + New technology = Improvement This combination of ideas is extremely worrisome. The old habit is capitalism. The new Technology will be adding the problematic old habit, resulting in catastrophic proportions of environmental damage. There is not any foreseeable improvement in sight. The ideas of eco-capitalism focus on one area, and work to enrich that area, regardless of the effects it has elsewhere.

There are now two choices for western nations, since they occupy the most favourable positions globally, they do not actually need to do anything about climate change. The reason for this being, the other nations will experience whatever we experience tenfold. The west will win this whether they commit to any climate change agreement or not. Even if they were to, it would still benefit them, making it another western victory, and a loss for humankind. The entire focus of the capitalistic environmental campaign is to create a world for our generation, and our children's generations. This is a unilateral vision, which doesn't really satisfy the needs of people much further than our own communities.

What would happen if each community were to think for themselves, instead of thinking for the collective interests of a nation, or the world? One does not to have a certain political affiliation to realize that economic interdependence throughout the nation is the most logical system. Not all communities have agricultural industry, and not all communities have a forestry industry. This idea would leave much of the world isolated. This, to me, is a prime example of the same bad habits, which were once before present with Mr. Gore's equation. I would stipulate that these bad habits would be the western way of thinking.

These bad habits, or as referred to in an Inconvenient Truth, "old" habits, have perfected colonialism, slavery, war, greed, and ultimately created the problem in the first place. If it were not for capitalism, any environment could become much more sustainable. Capitalists, in essence, sell to whatever the demand is. If the demand is for trees, if the demand is for oil, it shall be sold, because that is how the profit will be made.

It must be taken into consideration just how many simple amenities are produced in a non-sustainable matter and are purely capitalist in nature. An example would be Coffee. Citizens of Temiskaming are frequent consumers of Coffee of all kinds and the municipality is a host to a number of commercial establishments selling coffee. If the harvest of the materials necessary to produce coffee were done at a lesser extent as so it would last longer, it would only worsen the situations already present in that region of the world. Simply making their resources sustainable cannot solve this predicament. The desire for profiting from another's resource will not be quelled.

Any means to an end, is a tenet of capitalism, which should not be forgotten. The question now arises, what is to be the alternative solution to this dilemma? The first step will have to be changing the bad habits. I propose a new equation: Revised habits + New technologies = an Improved world Revising habits begins with changing the global situation. The west is to blame for its centuries of exploitation of the rest of the world. The time has come and it must now be held responsible for its crimes.

The culmination of environmental damage and complacency has resulted in a huge problem, which requires the help of the rest of the world. The newly developed doctrine of Sustainability as of right now is known as Agenda 21. It is a document concerning climate change, which member states must adhere to. According to this document all nations of the world must ignore political boundaries, and unite on common grounds; environmental issues. This cannot be perceived as a possibility because not all nations are of the same disposition. The levels of poverty in different nations around the world are a cause for division.

I need not describe exactly what poverty is. It is an undisputed fact that poverty occurs in every nation, yet one must also take into consideration the fact that those aforementioned "losers" experience a greater deal of poverty and are left at a less favourable position globally. Fortunately, Agenda 21 has a clause to address poverty. It reads as follows: "to reduce and eventually eliminate poverty". It is relatively simple to interpret the actual meaning of this provision. The word "reduce" puts it at a lesser priority to solve the problem, and the word "eventually" sums it up essentially, it is an issue that is of little importance and needs not be solved any time soon.

The most important environmental idea is that of sustainable development. By carefully planning and managing the resources at the disposal of a region they can be utilized indefinitely and benefit not only the current generation, but future generations as well. Economic factors must also be taken into account. Incentives such as paying individuals for recycling plastic bottles, and plans such as Carbon Credits are examples of what might be considered the beginning of personal responsibility. Sustainable Development is an idea, which is centric to the region that it purposes to make self-sufficient. However, the idea goes beyond any border.

Each nation needs to be able to sustain itself. The conflict this would create would be difficult to estimate judging by just how many large trade blocs there are at this point. Breaking these trade alliances at this point would leave weaker nations at a disposition less than favourable. They have up to this point, been reliant on larger nations to supply certain necessities to them. Ultimately, this is really a case of whomever draws the shorter straw loses in a big game. Small countries with little resources and huge populations are the losers.

Large nations with an abundance of resources and wealth will win. The cause for change in the environment has been somewhat of a trend. Much of the success can be attributed to the Inconvenient Truth, but also, a number of programs have surfaced which are doing relatively well amongst the populace. Most notable would perhaps be the Carbon Neutral solution, or Carbon Credits. It is a well known system and sounds clean and beneficial to everyone in theory. However, with some insightful reasoning, one can note the interesting flaws.

Carbon Neutral allows us to continue our lifestyles, which pollute and degrade the environment. It is really a project, which can be used to make a profit. Ultimately, as much money you spend on making something neutral, you are still creating pollution. The idea of being sustainable would focus on trying to keep your own region clean and pollution free. Furthermore not all citizens, who would be polluting, could afford to invest in this project. Therefore, it is really just a way for people to feel better about the pollution they create without actually having to change their way of living or their way of thinking.

The project has further pioneered ideas such as sending Solar Ovens to Honduras. It would be nice to see ourselves as the benevolent beings we purport ourselves to be. However, this is not the case. Solar ovens are sent to Honduras to prevent the people of Honduras from burning down the forest in their country for heat.

These solar ovens will prove more beneficial in the global cause of the environment, however, for Honduras, they are trivial in the big picture. It is suggested that the effects of climate change will render the nation uninhabitable. If this is to occur, it would really make the entire oven idea obsolete and relatively useless, especially considering that the people in Honduras already have their fate sealed. Charity is a wonderful idea; it provides for those who are most in need, however, in this case, it creates a dependency. The aid creates a dependency on the west. The nation will be dependent on the manufacturing of ovens, which, the western world will be profiting off as much as they possibly can until the inevitable demise of Honduras.

There is really no advantage for the people of Honduras to use these ovens; the only advantage here is for the western nations. We are not helping Honduras, and we are not helping anyone else but ourselves. The final question, people should ask themselves is: What is the purpose for a planet earth, if the only people who can receive any benefit from this are such a small minority of the rich upper class in the western world? While everyone else then suffers. If we were to eliminate the social and economic disparity in the world, then every nation, every people, every individual, could participate in the task of saving the environment on the same level and achieve a greater level of success.