Earth Day is about Self-Preservation

One of the better socio-political movements to come out of the turbulent 1960s was the environmental movement. There had been efforts to protect the ecosystems of the world before that, notably Theodore Roosevelt's establishment of Yellowstone National Park. It was in the 1960s, though, that being ecologically aware became mainstream. Today is the 29th Earth Day, to be observed with various clean-up efforts, seminars, the release of a Disney nature film, and more. The slogan is “Save the Earth.” That is, of course, scientific balderdash. Environmentalism isn't about saving the Earth but rather, it is about saving humanity.

To reduce Charles Darwin to his most basic, those individuals and species that are best suited to their environment are those who shall survive, procreate and continue to live through their descendants. Those less well-suited will die out. Radical changes in an ecosystem will, therefore, have serious consequences life in that ecosystem. Change is an enemy of those species and individuals who are flourishing (the political ramifications of this observation form the basis of most modern politics), while it offers opportunities for others to thrive.

Most biologists and paleontologists agree that some 95% of all species that ever existed on the planet are extinct, and that all but a fraction of those perished before homo sapiens ever showed up. That is the process of evolution. However, the emergence of humans in large numbers changes the game in one very important respect – humans don't adapt to their environment so much as they adapt the environment to suit themselves. Rather than stay where it was warm, humans put on furs and built fires to stay warm. The invention of agriculture meant humans had some control over their food supply.

The Earth has paid a price for this. North Africa was once excellent farmland, and Europe was heavily forested, but no more. The loss of the Amazon rain forest is merely a repetition of the burning of Europe's trees to fuel Western Civilization. However, the Earth doesn't care. The loss of forests merely means other species better suited to deserts can thrive. Life balances everything out.

For the human race, though, these changes represent threats to the species' success. Human survival strategies alter the environment and always have. When there were a few hundred thousand people on the planet, that didn't matter much. At 6 billion and counting, the planet is probably over-populated or getting there, and the changes are of a much greater magnitude. Malthus was partially right when he noted that there are constraints on population growth, and the corrective measures of starvation, disease and war are all unpleasant. Thae fact that the Pentagon considers climate change a threat to national security says it all.

The extent to which mankind's politics, economics and culture are devoted to preserving an environment in which the species thrives will largely determine what kind of future humanity will enjoy or suffer. Observing Earth Day every April 22 is not a bad idea, but what of the other 364 days of the year? The future of homo sapiens hinges on the answer.

© Copyright 2009 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Kensington Review Home