10-02-2009, 08:23 AM
Quote:I mean both. We citizens need to take ownership for what happens within the community, county, state, geography that we govern. But, whereas we can hold the polluter accountable, we should and when we are held accountable, then we would have the incentive to hold the actual polluter accountable. If it hits your bottom line, then you will be motivated to 1) prevent anyone from despoiling the land you govern, and 2) be more sensitive to despoiling other peoples land, and 3) willing to hold those responsible to account.The problem is that most of the time we are not dealing with the drum with a skull and bones sign on it leaking in the sand-box of the local playground. We are dealing with global problems. Think about CO2 (not poisonous but giving environmental problems) CFKs (not poisonous but leading to the hole in the ozone layer), agent orange (leading to heavily handicapped babies even after 30 years), build up of heavy metals in seafish etc. etc.
It is already difficult for governments to check what is going on during the production of our, food/toys/electronics because most of it is coming from abroad. And even when it is known people don't act because often teh results of a certain pollution are not directly visible, a certain disease (say cancer) can almost never be 100 % proven contruibuted to a certain pollution, leaving your car and taking a bike or walking to work will not directly show you an 'improvement' in the climate. etc. etc. etc.
It is easy to say 'we citizens blabla....' but as long as in elections in most countries on this planet the environment is number 97 on the list of most important issues nothing is going to change.
Most people know that food for cattle (for meat production) makes us destroy the rainforest (soy beans) but nobody will eat a steak less because of that.