I began writing these commentaries 10 years and one week ago. These were originally audio files posted at soapbox.org and after five years morphed into what you see today, but that’s another story. I wasn’t going to note the passing of the decade, as I generally find anniversary journalism unedifying, but I started reading through some old pieces and found one that might be worth updating.
Ten years ago this week, my commentary was called, “The Sky Falls in Pieces.” ( http://markfloegel.org/index.php?s=sky+falls+in+pieces&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=Search) The topic was suggested by a conversation I had with a journalist who complained that too often environmentalists claim “the sky is falling” when, in fact, it is not.
My response was that the sky falls in pieces, that when a species goes extinct or a virgin forest is clear cut, then a piece of sky has fallen there. When your community is poisoned by toxic chemicals or your child is diagnosed with cancer or you learn you can’t have children, then the sky has fallen on you.
In the ten years since, two things have become clear: first, looking for pieces of falling sky only through the lens of the environment is far too narrow. We can’t (and shouldn’t) limit our view of the world to one point of view. If being an environmentalist has taught me anything, it should be that I have to look at the ecosystem or social system as a whole. Second, the sky does not so much “fall” on us as much as we willingly pull it from the heavens. For instance, the may have fallen on all those folks along the Gulf Coast last year, but the befuddled and ham-handed response, or non-response, of the federal government compounded the tragedy.
After a decade of these weekly hunt-and-peck sessions, I’m sorry to report that the sky seems to be falling over the heads of more people than ever before. How much sky have we pulled down on undocumented workers in this country or in the home countries from which they fled, on the people of Darfur and Iraq? How much sky will we pull down – and where – in the next few years?
As I said then, “Once you’ve been hit by a piece of falling sky, your life changes. You cross a line and you can’t go back. The people on the other side of the line, where you used to be, don’t understand you anymore. You’re not even sure they can hear you.”
That’s still true, but it points to another problem with my answer to the journalist’s statement of 1996. Journalists and environmentalists, as an occupational hazard, meet more falling-sky victims than most of us. It’s an environmentalist’s job to sympathize and a journalist’s to be skeptical. It’s understandable that they might respond by growing a callus on their compassion, just to get them through the week. Some journalists accuse activists (with some truth) of being too willing to be shocked by bad news. At some level, perhaps, we want to be shocked, to reinforce our cynical view of society, to get an addict’s fix of adrenaline and outrage.
This age of information gives us so many opportunities to learn and so few to act, particularly at the global level. We can (and should, in three weeks) vote for the best candidates we can, but we also need to seek ways to hold up the sky or lift it from the shoulders of those upon whom it has fallen.
The environmentalist’s ecosystem approach is a good place to start, recognizing that all things are connected. Maybe there’s little we can do as individuals to stop the genocide in Darfur, but there are things we can do in our communities to make strangers welcome. The only tings that really matter are the strength of our intentions and the fact that we take action.
Still Falling
I began writing these commentaries 10 years and one week ago. These were originally audio files posted at soapbox.org and after five years morphed into what you see today, but that’s another story. I wasn’t going to note the passing of the decade, as I generally find anniversary journalism unedifying, but I started reading through some old pieces and found one that might be worth updating.
Ten years ago this week, my commentary was called, “The Sky Falls in Pieces.” ( http://markfloegel.org/index.php?s=sky+falls+in+pieces&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=Search) The topic was suggested by a conversation I had with a journalist who complained that too often environmentalists claim “the sky is falling” when, in fact, it is not.
My response was that the sky falls in pieces, that when a species goes extinct or a virgin forest is clear cut, then a piece of sky has fallen there. When your community is poisoned by toxic chemicals or your child is diagnosed with cancer or you learn you can’t have children, then the sky has fallen on you.
In the ten years since, two things have become clear: first, looking for pieces of falling sky only through the lens of the environment is far too narrow. We can’t (and shouldn’t) limit our view of the world to one point of view. If being an environmentalist has taught me anything, it should be that I have to look at the ecosystem or social system as a whole. Second, the sky does not so much “fall” on us as much as we willingly pull it from the heavens. For instance, the may have fallen on all those folks along the Gulf Coast last year, but the befuddled and ham-handed response, or non-response, of the federal government compounded the tragedy.
After a decade of these weekly hunt-and-peck sessions, I’m sorry to report that the sky seems to be falling over the heads of more people than ever before. How much sky have we pulled down on undocumented workers in this country or in the home countries from which they fled, on the people of Darfur and Iraq? How much sky will we pull down – and where – in the next few years?
As I said then, “Once you’ve been hit by a piece of falling sky, your life changes. You cross a line and you can’t go back. The people on the other side of the line, where you used to be, don’t understand you anymore. You’re not even sure they can hear you.”
That’s still true, but it points to another problem with my answer to the journalist’s statement of 1996. Journalists and environmentalists, as an occupational hazard, meet more falling-sky victims than most of us. It’s an environmentalist’s job to sympathize and a journalist’s to be skeptical. It’s understandable that they might respond by growing a callus on their compassion, just to get them through the week. Some journalists accuse activists (with some truth) of being too willing to be shocked by bad news. At some level, perhaps, we want to be shocked, to reinforce our cynical view of society, to get an addict’s fix of adrenaline and outrage.
This age of information gives us so many opportunities to learn and so few to act, particularly at the global level. We can (and should, in three weeks) vote for the best candidates we can, but we also need to seek ways to hold up the sky or lift it from the shoulders of those upon whom it has fallen.
The environmentalist’s ecosystem approach is a good place to start, recognizing that all things are connected. Maybe there’s little we can do as individuals to stop the genocide in Darfur, but there are things we can do in our communities to make strangers welcome. The only tings that really matter are the strength of our intentions and the fact that we take action.
© Mark Floegel, 2006