A Conservationist Manifesto

Manifesto: a written statement declaring publicly the intentions, motives, or views of its issuer (Merriam Webster)


Looking at the word manifesto alone provides insight into what exactly The Conservationist Manifesto by Scott Russell Sanders might entail.  The process of titling something with the term manifesto allows for the author to express their ideas in a manner that does not necessarily have to coincide with what is "politically correct" or what is viewed as an appropriate perspective.  As the manifesto title would indicate, within his book, Scott Sanders calls into question the ideals and "progress" of both past and contemporary society and the role, or lack there of, that the environment plays within our day-to-day decisions.  


Part I of the book is titled, Caring for the Earth and in this section of the book, Sanders introduces ideas that call into question the livelihood of "the American dream".  Sanders introduces an example from Bloomington, in which the owner of a woods sells his property to a real estate developer.  The American dream is characterized now by what is necessarily right moral, but rather what is easiest and most profitable.  The current approach to our dealings with the environment often places the good old dollar ahead of the ecosystems, animals and forests.  Sanders describes this approach to life as the "fraying of the fabric of life", arguing that "[the population] simply den[ies] there is any reason for concern, and the more the evidence piles up, the louder their denials" (6).  Sanders presents account after account which emphasizes ideals such as greed and efficiency (not in the environmental sense) taking precedent over the one thing that makes our lives possible--the environment. He does not argue that the population as a whole should get along without using resources from the environment, rather he calls into question the degree to which we should use (pillage) the environment.  The environment used to encompass the idea of the "commons"--an idea which was ultimately discarded as upper-class and well off citizens began to privatize the "new world" and having initially indentured servants and slaves to work their land.  This idea has evolved into the current state of the economy where the upper-class are now multinational corporations and the workers comprised of the middle-class.  


Sanders takes a shot a right-wing politics when he states that our politicians often discuss legislation that is "almost entirely about private wealth and private solutions" (30).  This approach thus creates a cycle that when there is a need/problem or issue within society there is always somewhere to turn within the market.  He gives the example of crime, instead of fixing crime there is always a security system, safer communities or purchasing a gun--there is always somewhere to turn, which only perpetuates the initial problem.  Our ideas are continually distorted through media campaigns by corporations and interest groups supported by big business that ultimately dictate legislative practices.  When issues arise in politics, politicians always go the fail safe--tax cuts, which provide the public with more money in their pockets, while making the rich even richer.  When the environment makes it into the discussion and action is taken, it often complicates the lives of individuals and may cut into their pockets.  Sanders provides the example of farmers in the state of Indiana, who when asked to regulate and revamp their use of pesticides by the government are quick to pass the buck by calling these actions "communist" in nature (38).  

Within the chapter titled, "A Few Earthly Words", Sanders goes about analyzing and pointing out the discrepancies that exist between the true meaning of words and the current understanding of specific words and how we have evolved our language to meet our societal needs.  He concludes the chapter with the following sentiment, "In order to bring the voice of the land into our councils and kitchens,we need to reclaim this evocative, sensuous, and earthly speech" (58).  Part I of the book provides thorough insight into exactly what Sanders is trying to achieve within his manifesto.  Society as a whole has become too disconnected with the environment and has let our personal and political agendas trump the entity that enables us to exist.  Sanders objective seems to be somewhat idealistic in the sense that he calls into question our economic approach to life (why not? it's a manifesto), however I can identify with his frustration with the way that we approach our everyday lives, especially with the way in which corporations dictate such a large portion of society.  Overall I feel as though his ideas are idealistic--ideas that I agree with, but ideas that are far too large and not fully attainable within the polarized nature of our political structure, in addition to the the trump card that is money, which ultimately lies in the hands of corporations and individuals whose private gains trump that of Sanders' perceived societal ideals.  I believe that the ideas within Sanders' manifesto need to be taken for what they are--his perception of society, and should not be criticized for their lack of practicality, but taken for the excellent and deep insights that they truly are.