...may stem from the seemingly uncomfortable place of having to both ask questions about and question what is business as usual, what makes up our "normal" lifestyle, our worldviews.
Granted, there are ways in which people (who are passionate and knowledgeable) can emphasize the urgency and calamity of the multiple "issues" surrounding our environment, so much so, that tension rather than inspiring hope is the end result. We don't want children to live in fear and in midst of the milieu of experiences that do incite fear/worry, we cannot evade assuming responsibility for approaching in an honest way our collective reality, along side our animal/plant relatives.
Sometimes I get the feeling that it's not so much fear that triggers peoples' response, but almost a sense of entitlement for simply not wanting to "deal" with things.
It doesn't help of course, that people who immediately politicize an issue are resistant to seeing beyond labeling (i.e. liberal/conservative). Hopefully, as the principle of interconnectedness becomes more evident and LIVE for folks in front of their t.v. sets, the supermarket cashier, and other places of commons, we'll be forced to come up with solutions that consider the impact of our attitudes, our decision-making.
I think of those who are intentional about putting a spin on the whole world food hunger discourse to the benefit of multinational corporations such as Monsanto, Cargill, etc.
This kind of opportunistic usage of "issues" is very problematic for motivating people to have a different point of entry into the conversation, which should be broadening (we hope, at this point in time!)
No comments:
Post a Comment