Thursday, February 6, 2014
Deep Ecology
Through our reading I came across a really interesting idea. It was that "bioregions should replace nation-states as the fundamental geographical unit in terms of which humans think and live." I gave this idea a lot of thought and to me it seems to make sense. This would of course would never be realistic in today's society with set in place nations, but the idea as a whole would be comprehensible. People living in the same bioregion are obviously more likely to have similar traditions, views, and religious beliefs. Look for instance at the United States. The climate of New England is dissimilar from that of the more southern states, as are a lot of the traditions, views, and religious beliefs. Would this make sense for larger countries to be divided into bioregions or for smaller countries to expand and combine to form these bioregion nations? Bioregion nations would also have the same concerns when it comes to the environment as it is the same climate with the same kinds of vegetation throughout. I feel like these bioregions would make it easier to govern, especially when it came to environmental policy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That idea stuck out to me too. It seems to make sense, especially in terms of forming environmental policy like you said, as well as fostering local government, economic equality, food systems, etc. But so much power would have to be shifted and relinquished, it sounds more like an idea for a post-apocalyptic reconstruction effort than a serious proposal.
ReplyDeleteIt makes me wonder though, if and how we could peacefully arrive at a society structured this way. If it did require great strife and turmoil, as through revolution, I'm not sure the deep ecologists would be on board, considering their more holistic perspective of valuation.