The Old Testament says that the earth was given to man to take care of. Despite the fact that many think that the bible was dictated to those chosen and inspired by the word of god, what if the Biblical idea of “given” is wrong? What if it describes ownership, an un-spiritual state of mind which has taken over our current American if not western civilization (excluding the American Indians who only saw and see themselves as sharing.) What if the god-inspirited state creates a spiritual relationship between man and god and earth? What if the divine story is that man was given to the earth along with all her living beings – plant and animal and evolving molecular structures to cohabit and take care of?
The confusion of man’s relationship to earth and all living things and natural substances like oil and gas and coal, has created an enormous controversy about man’s relationship to the all. There are those who think that there must be national parks which cannot be invaded by fracking and hunting and roads and restaurants and hotels, etc. by man inhabiting, polluting, and creating general ruination. There are those who consider creating parks old fashioned because they do not consider man’s needs as a separate and super-important category. For such people, man is the center of the universe.
There are even some in the current environmental movement who have been seduced by the current mood swing into thinking that that nature is to be used “wisely.” These are the sustainable development folk who aim to keep man going on the highest socioeconomic level. But what does getting this all this stuff take from life? Is our lack of awareness due to wearing blinders colored and framed by need? Whose need it is? Is it a natural need or one created by endless advertising framed to make us feel empty, inadequate and deprived?
The issue of Wise Use, which means taking some but not all the stuff or at least not all right now, is running its head into a wall of controversy. The word use is at the heart of the matter. Was nature created for man to use? Is man supposed to covet and hoard and take and steal and keep for himself all the uranium, coal, supposed to cut down all the trees in the Amazon to raise cattle for hamburger, to shoot big game and bring about general extinction? Are the big players supposed to take public money once designated for schools and hospitals and parks? Is the voting game rigged into winners and losers including voting machines that cannot count?
The losers include living things as well as the people sans power. In Florida, a state of endless sunlight, the solar industry has been greatly weakened by the oil and natural gas and coal companies, who both buy the state officials as well as spend money to fund endless propaganda about the tragedy of going solar. They do this to protect their absolute monopoly on electricity sales. Money and power win over the need of the general population.
We need to look at the ultimate consequences of giving into the corporate principal of profit at any cost. Chop down every tree, there will be no air to breathe. Use gas, oil, coal to power everything, accidents and pollution will kill the rest of us. Create wars over who owns the oil and create an endless procession of refugees who lack a home. Raise the world’s temperature and watch islands sink beneath the rising seas with great cities going next. It goes on and on, shortsightedness pertaining to having more which will kill all of us.
What if the essential message instead of use is share as part of a living family? The emphasis would be on preservation. What of those starving families who need to cut down trees in order to plant and eat? Why are there so many of them? The pharmaceutical industry, afraid of losing money will not let them create generic copies of pills for birth control. Although next to nothing would be lost by people who lack money, the idea of profit guides corporate action.
The idea of making profit, a corporate idea has entered the general population as an accepted principle. The governing people who must come up with megabucks to run for office are in the pocket of corporations which give them the money they need to run. Their concern with human welfare, animal survival, park survival, with anything concerning general care must be ignored.
If the government allotted each person running for office a certain amount to use for advertising and disallowed any other spending; if it had the campaign run say for a month, there would be tax money for schools and day care and park sustenance, for cleaning the environment. Laws would be passed and upheld to end further pollution, Medicare for all, etc. We would regain our spirit of connection.