Dropping cargo meant to kill invasive species will only lead to more environmental predicaments. But try telling this to U.S. personnel in helicopters descending upon Guam, and their $8 million mission parachuting 2,000 mice injected with Tylenol into canopies to try and kill overpopulated brown tree snakes.(1) It was also reminiscent of another dubious mission when in the 1950’s, the World Health Organization bombarded Borneo with massive doses of DDT, part of the Green Revolution, and to fight malaria spread by mosquitoes. As wasps ate the mosquitoes and other so-called pests, and then cockroaches ate the wasps which were then eaten by lizards, DDT, an extremely deadly toxin, worked its way up the food chain to Borneo’s cats. Before long, cats had all but died out and millions of rats took over the island, devouring the fruit and grains of the fields while spreading typhus and other diseases. Faced with this unforeseen invasion of rats, the experts convened another crisis committee and decided to parachute in hundreds of cats.
While the invasive brown tree snakes made their way to Guam via cargo shipments, thanks to globalization, that is international militarism and commerce, DDT was used on the island of Borneo to increase food and eradicate diseases. In each case the causes of ecological imbalance was brought on by another type of chain, a belief in technology and automated mindset. Modern technocentrism-where humankinds primary relationship with the environment is mediated through technologies, and that humankinds main interest in the environment is a productive and economic one(2)-made Borneo and Guam to be overran by rats and snakes. Technocentrism has caused other predicaments too, like global warming and climate change, chemical and nuclear disasters (Bhopal, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima), and large-scale deforestation and depletion of soils brought on by urban development, dams and road-building schemes.
When technocentrism and mega-technology, with their invasive appetites of unsustainable growth, creates more environmental crises, automated thinking assumes more technological development can heal, repair or restore the ecological damage caused by environmentally insensitive technologies. Sadly, they eradicate other possible causes of environmental degradation, usually caused by misguided political, social and ethical behaviors and policies. Technocentric and mega-technological perspectives can also rule out any discussion or acknowledgement of how humankind’s ethical, political and economic priorities will have to be transformed to prevent more ecological imbalances. Only an environmental-changing conversion that enables people to view technologies through the environment, in which humankinds primary relationship with technologies is mediated via environment and that humankinds main interest in technologies is an environmentally unproductive one, will prevent more environmental ruin.
In “The Long Descent,” John Michael Greer writes how humankind no longer faces a problem that entails a solution, but instead a predicament which has no solution. Thanks to the invasiveness of technocentrism, mega-technologies and automated thinking, it will take centuries to unravel the damage committed against the Earth and its delicate ecosystems, some of which have already disappeared. Thus, humankind’s only hope is to develop appropriate responses that will lessen an oncoming collapse followed by major upheavals and dislocations. Appropriate responses will not consist of more techno-fixes, nor technocentric solutions, but human- and mental- and behavioral-fixes that are environmentally centered, starting with rejecting ill-conceived efforts to liberalize and globalize militaries and markets, including their militant techno-centric perceptions and rapacious mega-technologies.
The object of “To Tell the Truth,” a popular afternoon game show which aired on television many years ago, was to ask questions and try to figure out which contestants were lying, and which one was actually telling the truth about who they really were. At the end of the show the host would say, “Will the real (name) please stand up!” After a long and anticipated pause, the real person would finally stand up. From Borneo to Guam and many other places around the world, the real culprits might not be those species that walk on all fours. The real invasive species might be those who walk up but not right in regards to their environmental surroundings and are carriers of technocentric and anthropomorphic ideologies. At the same time, the real threats to sustainable environments, balanced ecologies, and the future might not even be killer bees or ants but instead, killer technologies and mega-technologies. Hasn’t invasive technocentrism produced environmental inequalities for much too long? Isn’t it time to walk up and right?
(1) www.washingtontimes.com, U.S. drops 2,000 mice on Guam-by parachute-to kill snakes by Douglas Ernst. 12/3/2013.
(2) Barry, John and E. Gene Frankland. International Encyclopedia Of Environmental Politics. New York, New York: Routledge Press, 2002., p. 446.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.