The Green Hypocrisy Conundrum
I came across a post at Hugg this morning that really intrigued me. It reminded me of an overall question that’s been rattling around in my head for quite some time. Essentially my query is this - if a person/organization inspires positive change on the environmental front, yet falls somewhat short in their own activities, should their ‘hypocrisy’ outweigh all the good things they have accomplished?
Judging by the number of articles I come across lashing out at those who don’t quite ‘practice what they preach’ (many of them interestingly written by green-minded people), it’s pretty clear that many would indeed say ‘YES!!!’.
Hmmmm…
I think what really got me thinking about this issue in the first place was a comment my brother-in-law made re: so-called ‘green celebrities’. Essentially he was pointing out that celebrity environmentalism is mostly hype - that is to say that most celebrities who have jumped on the enviro-bandwagon don’t actually live according to the doctrine that they preach, so why should we applaud their efforts?
There is no doubt about it - he does have a point…BUT, I can’t say I agree wholeheartedly with that line of thinking in general. Why completely discount a person’s efforts if they are producing a net positive result?
What this all reminds me of is the idea behind carbon offsetting. Let’s say Leonardo DiCaprio’s lifestyle produces 5 times more CO2 emissions than the average American citizen (this is completely hypothetical of course!), yet his words (inspiring others to take action) and financial contributions are responsible for an overall reduction in emissions 10,000X that achieved by those with less influence? Should we really be spending time digging up and pointing out his shortcomings? (again, this was a completely hypothetical example - I have no clue how much Leo contributes, whether good or bad)
Obviously it would be pretty well impossible to accurately calculate the amount of ‘good’ derived from a particular person’s efforts and I think that might be where the problem lies. While it’s relatively easy to calculate someone’s personal CO2 contributions (the ‘bad’), how could we ever fully quanitify the extent of their positive influence?
The story at Hugg today was reporting on allegations that Al Gore is an energy-guzzler (supposedly using 20X the national average), and links over to an article at Energy Refuge. The author of said article poses the question, “is [Al Gore] a true environmentalist or a phony?”.
Now before I continue with my rambling, please be assured that the point of this post is NOT to rush to Al Gore’s defence and slam the author of the article. The specifics of this particular example are of much less interest to me than this overall topic in general.
I guess I’ve just always found it funny how some people are so quick to point out people’s foibles and weaknesses, rather than considering things from a ‘big picture’ perspective and at least acknowledging the person’s overall positive contribution at the same time.
Of course this is not to say that people should not be held accountable for their words and actions. Believe it or not I actually do feel strongly about the idea of ‘practicing what you preach’. Obviously if a prominent animal rights activist also happened to club baby seals in his spare time it would be understandable to question this individual’s integrity.
Returning back to the Al Gore example, I guess I just find it amusing to see how quickly he falls from the status of ‘hero’ to ‘phony’ in some people’s minds, without any consideration for the overall positive influence he has had. Should all of us (who promote the green movement) therefore be considered phonies if we still do things that aren’t 100% earth-friendly while actively promoting ‘all things green’?
Interestingly enough, the actual owner (aka ‘EnergyDude’) of Energy Refuge wrote his own article on the topic (the other article was written by one of his contributors) offering a more forgiving perspective, and certainly one that falls more in line with my own views. Be sure to check it out as well: Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, and My Views.
Anyway, I’m definitely not trying to stir the pot too much here (hehe)! This is just a discussion topic I happen to find genuinely intriguing! I have little doubt that there are many people with much stronger views than mine (on both sides of the coin), and perhaps we’ll even hear from a few of them. 
Technorati Tags: al gore, inconvenient truth, carbon offsets, emissions, global warming, climate change, phony, hypocrisy
Written by Bentley on February 28th, 2007 with
no comments.
Read more articles on Green Commentary.
- [+] Digg: Feature this article
- [+] Del.icio.us: Bookmark this article
- [+] Furl: Bookmark this article
