HawksleyDebatePaper2

**Is American Culture a Sustainability Problem?** Culture can be defined as the sum of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values, and knowledge, which constitute shared bases of social action and distinguish one group of people from another. (4) American culture is based on the idea that each individual can choose to live their life in whichever way they choose and revolves around the value of having a high quality of life. The lure of these ideas has brought many immigrants since the founding of the nation, which has created a culturally diverse country that is melded together. The age of industrialization turned America into a culture of consumption and consumerism. This brought many advantages that made life ‘easier’, but would also result in sustainability problems down the road. Americans are now beginning to be aware of the sustainability problems in our society. Some generally accepted problems include the use of inefficient gasoline and diesel vehicles as well as inefficient appliances. So, there has been a push to “Go Green” to help with these problems. However, the sustainability problems we face are complicated ones, and maybe we should ask ourselves if American culture itself is a sustainability problem. Everyone on the planet is a stakeholder with respect to sustainability issues because our actions are depleting the Earth’s natural resources and disrupting its natural cycles. Americans are particularly important stakeholders because if the key to the problem is a change in culture, there will have to be drastic changes to the way of life of all Americans. Problems such as climate change, depletion of natural resources, poverty, pollution, and lack of biodiversity can be considered sub-issues in the scope of American culture.
 * Erika Hawksley**
 * Debate Paper #2**
 * Words:1543**

In her speech on TED Talk, entitled //Addicted to Risk//, Naomi Klein argues that American culture is a sustainability problem because, “…we are far too willing to gamble on things that are far too precious, with no exit strategy.”(2) She persuades her audience that American culture is addicted to taking risks to make a profit and we need to become aware of the consequences that this risk taking is having on our planet. Klein points out that people should stop questioning the legitimacy of problems like climate change because we can’t afford to wait for proof. She presents the ideological framework that actions should be taken now based on the precautionary principle in order to prevent devastation of the Earth before it is too late. Klein brings up the idea that we have been reckless with Mother Nature. She blames this recklessness on the “greed and hubris” in our culture, men in our society and the roles we give them, as well an underlying assumption people have that nature’s resources are limitless. Klein argues that these ideas are at the root of our problem. She supports this idea of recklessness by explaining that we have begun to turn to extreme forms of energy because we are depleting the common sources. Klein points out that deep ocean drilling for oil, hydraulic fracturing for natural gas, and massive strip mining for coal are examples of the extreme energy sources we are already resorting too. Klein also unveils that, as a culture, we keep telling ourselves the same old story that everything will be okay and somehow our problems will work themselves out. She suggests that ideas like, “Technology is our savior”, should be thrown out the window because technology goes hand in hand with the over consumption in our culture that put us in this position in the first place. Klein recites the following quote near the end of her argument that summarizes what she believes embodies the actions of American culture; “Civilizations commit suicide by slamming on the accelerator at the exact moment when they should be putting on the breaks.” Naomi Klein’s speech is well articulated and convincing, but was not supported by much scientific data. She relied on making use of ideas that were recognizable by most people to create impact on her audience. I noticed her audience was all women and her argument was clearly structured to take advantage of that. Klein vilified men as being the root of our culture’s recklessness because they tend to be more overconfident that women. I don’t think many men watching would be convinced by her argument after hearing this point and they may be offended by her comments. Klein only makes a point of convincing people that our culture is the problem, but does not provide suggestions to solve our sustainability problem. She only makes a vague proposal that we need to create ‘new stories’ with ‘new heroes’. (2)

In Ronald Reagan’s //Official Announcement of Candidacy for President// for the 1979 Presidential Nomination, Reagan makes it clear that he is a proud of America’s culture. He associates America with success, resilience, and hard work, that can’t be found anywhere else, which supports the argu ment that American culture is not a sustainability problem. Reagan boasts about America, quoting, “…an American lives in anticipation of the future because he knows it will be a great place. Other people fear the future as just a repetition of past failures.” (3) He states that he doesn’t believe that America has reached its’ decline, as some people claim, and he believes that having a high standard of living is an earned privilege of all Americans, not a selfish extravagance. Reagan recognizes that there are potential sustainability problems with regards to pollution and energy, but he attributes the crisis to the failure of our leaders, not to the nature of American culture. He proposes that as President he would help resolve the issues by setting goals for Americans to achieve in order to measure progress. With regards to the energy problems specifically, Reagan suggests that the dependence on imported fuels should be reduced, while further developing domestic oil and gas, and researching new alternatives. Reagan points out that the problem with the state of the economy is the biggest issue that people should be concerned with and he plans on focusing on that issue. He generally thinks that America is the best country to live in and Americans just need a great leader to restore their faith in their country and culture.

Reagan’s argument may have been readily accepted at the time, but I think it would be less effective today. He effectively utilized the underlying feeling we all have had and would like to believe that America is the land of opportunity where everyone can fulfill their dreams. Though some people may have this experience, we cannot avoid the fact that America has problems like poverty, discrimination, and corruption. In today’s society, sustainability problems can’t be ignored and I think fewer people would be convinced by that nostalgic image of what the idyllic American culture is like. Reagan’s plan to fix critical issues by establishing goals for the American people was very vague and could have made a stronger piece in his argument if he laid out specific things he wanted to accomplish.

In her article //U.S. Cult of Greed...,// Suzanne Goldenberg extends Klein’s argument that American culture is a sustainability problem through the discussion of greed in our society and the need to consume goods and services. Goldenberg makes her argument through the use of many facts, which creates a shock and awe type experience for readers. Using statements like, “The average American consumes more than his or her weight in products each day”, makes it difficult to argue against the idea that American culture revolves around consumption and it thus unsustainable. (1) Goldenberg’s argument is more substantial that Klein’s due to the use of data compared to the emotional appeal that Klein relies on to convince her audience. Goldenberg’s argument also differs from Klein’s in that Goldenberg thinks American culture is not only a problem, but that we have spread this problem culture to other nations, making global sustainability impossible. Goldenberg’s argument drastically contrasts from Reagan’s because Goldenberg doesn’t try to glamorize American culture in the slightest. Reagan’s speech makes us feel proud to be Americans living in the best place in the world, whereas Goldenberg makes readers disgusted or ashamed about horrible America’s consumption statistics and how we are ruining the world.

I think that American culture is a sustainability problem and I was convinced by both Klein and Goldenberg’s arguments. The need to buy and consume more and more each year is ingrained into our culture, which directly undermines efforts made to fix sustainability issues that have resulted as a byproduct of our culture. It will be a very difficult task to create a sustainable society and it will take progressive action over a long period of time. We need to continue working on reducing our environmental impact by working on the sub-issues, while simultaneously trying to move away from the greedy consumerism culture we currently have.

=**Sources**= 1. Goldenberg, Suzanne. “ US cult of greed is now a global environmental threat. ” //The Guardian.// 12 January 2010. Web. 23 October 2011. <[]>

2. Klein, Naomi. “Addicted to Risk.” //TED Talk//. December 2010. Web. 21 October 2011. <[]>

3. Reagan, Ronald. “Official Announcement of Candidacy for President.” //Reagan 2020 U.S//. 13 November 1979. Web. 21 October 2011. <[]>

4. Collins. Word English Dictionary. Web. 24 October 2011. <[]>