Here is an example of a kritik for the old environment topic.
Scapegoating-K
Institutionalizes pollution & entrenches the failed assumptions & structures of past environmental law failures & law fossilization & ignores the root problem. Bobertz in ‘95 (Professor Bobertz, legitimizing Pollution”, Texas Law Review, 1995, p.749)
The passage of environmental laws, as with the creation of any legal regime of social reform, establishes new expectation and incentives and results in new patterns of behavior. Unavoidably, laws rely on and institutionalize the repugnant assumptions of their period. When the engine of lawmaking produce the kind of massive legal system epitomized by environmental law, the system (with its then-prevailing wisdom) solidifies over tim into a set of expectations around which subsequent legal and technical developments must adapt. The fact that regulated businesses desire consistency in the application of the law only hastens the fossilization of assumptions buried within the system? original framework. Although any number of assumptions about the nature of environmental problems could be extracted from a study of environmental law, one in particular has driven the system from the beginning: the idea that pollution”--the stuff billowing from the top of the smokestack--is itself the problem on which the legislative eye should focus. Pollution is not viewed as the result of other problems; it defines--or is--the problem itself. Deeply engrained in our vocabulary and world view, this idea has clearly molded American pollution control” laws and their emphasis on treatment and disposal at the end pipe (that is, the point at which pollution itself becomes manifest). In turn, this emphasis reinforces the cultural view that pollution itself, rather than its deeper roots, is the evil to be eliminated by acts of legislation.
Environmental law frees the Innocent”--creating the scapegoating effect & legitimizing pollution. Bobertz in ‘95 (Professor Bobertz, legitimizing Pollution”, Texas Law Review, 1995, p.743)
Ultimately, the legacy of environmental scapegoating may be the paradox of legitimizing pollution activities while simultaneously appearing to curtail them. The legitimizing effect of environmental lawmaking involves two factors that will be discussed in detail in separate sections below. The first section notes that environmental legislation does not merely punish the blameworthy; it exonerates the innocent.” Upon the conviction of one suspect, the others are set free. Thus, the appearance of positive action in Washington (or the state capital) creates the impression that a problem has been solved and repairs the perceived break in the social order that had given the law its initial momentum.
Environmental law rids us of guilt & allows us to avoid asking the larger questions of sustainability, industry, agriculture, and personal behavior. Bobertz in ‘95 (Professor Bobertz, Legitimizing Pollution”, Texas Law Review, 1995, p.748)
The enactment of environmental laws also includes a less virtuous tendency to return with one hand what is taken with the other. We wish to exorcise our demons, but still retain the pleasures of their company. A law that strikes at the external manifestations if an environmental problem satisfies the common desire for identifying and banishing the guilty. On a personal level, however, no one wants her own habits exposed to the same harsh light. By acting with righteous vehemence against the visible end-products of pollution, we avoid asking harder questions about global resource allocation and the sustainability of existing industrial, agricultural, and personal patterns of behavior. Enactment of environmental laws not only releases us from guilt--or the state of being ?art of the problem”--but also enables us to avoid scrutinizing deeper patterns that implicate our personal habits and appetites. Few would like to admit these habits, and simply the immediate targets of environmental law, create the very problems the law appears to address. In this manner, laws aimed at curtailing pollution can ultimately create barriers to lasting reform by legitimizing the more deeply rooted causes of pollution that the very process of lawmaking has exonerated from blame. Except for the environmental scapegoats--duly shamed and punished--the rest of society is liberated, free to pursue its old ways without fear of reprisal.
--Democracy is Best-- Decision Rule-Must Strive for Democracy. Avakian in ‘86 Avakian 1986 (Democracy: Can? We Do Better Than That?, Bob, Founder of the Revolutionary Union, p.80)
At this point it might be objected that, yes, there are many imperfections in the democratic system of government and it is true that many horrendous things are done in the name of democracy, but, with all its faults, democracy is still the best form of government possible and democracy as an idea represents the loftiest vision of how society should function--something to be striven for, even if it can never be fully realized.
Democracy outweighs all--key to the common good. Dye in ‘69 (Dye in 69, Thomas Dye, Florida State, American Government Theory, Structure, Theory, and Practice, p.32)
Mill placed great emphasis on the value of political participation. Active persons are intrinsically better than passive ones....To Mill, participation, even, in the smallest public function, is useful and good: It has educational value and enhances one? feeling of self-respect; it requires the private citizen to weigh not only his own interest but the common good. In short, it was evident to Mill that popular government is superior to absolute government in advancing the welfare of the community, in improving the character of its citizens, and in realizing the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
--Moral Imperative-- Scapegoating is a moral evil of the most extreme degree because each of us has a moral obligation to protect the environment. The Futurist in '95 Raven, Peter, the director of the Missouri Botanical Gardens, A time of catastrophic extinction.., Vol. 29, Futurist, 09-01-1995, pg 38. (Electronic Library On-Line)
Why does biodiversity matter? There are three classes of reason for concern. The first is ethical and aesthetic. As Wilson and population expert Paul Ehrlich put it in 1990, "Because Homo sapiens is the dominant species on Earth, we and many others think that people have an absolute moral responsibility to protect what are our only known living companions in the universe. Human responsibility in this respect is deep, beyond measure, beyond conventional science for the moment, but urgent nonetheless. "
Each of us has a moral obligation to protect the planet. Zins in '92 Zins, Daniel, Discussions of recent books: Confronting nuclear holocaust.., Vol.. 68, Virginia Quarterly Review, 06-01-1992, pg 578
In their final chapter Lifton and Markusen offer a moral equivalent to the genoeidal mentality: "a species mentality." "Saying no to professional involvement in genocide," they observe, "is the beginning of saying yes to the requirements of the human species." ....As we approach the end of this murderous century, perhaps nothing is in greater need of correction than how we symbolize our connections with the planet's other creatures. "Species awareness," Lifton and Markusen note near the end of their study, "inevitably extends to the habitat of all species, to the earth and its ecosystem." We are now being warned with greater and greater frequency that our very survival as a human species will demand a much greater awareness of, and respect for, the inherent right to live of the planet's other species. The Genocidal Mentality itself touches only very briefly on the increasing possibility of environmental Holocaust, which is now being cited by more and more national security managers and other elites as the chief threat to international security.
Movements Environmental crisis =? new mindset. Naess in ‘89 (Arne Naess, Professor of Philosophy at Osla, Ecology, Community, & Lifestyle, 1989, p..26)
The crisis of life conditions on Earth could help us choose a new path with new criteria for progress, efficiency, and rational action. This positive aspect of our situation has inspired Ecology, Community, and Lifestyle. THe environmental crisis could inspire a new renaissance; new social forms of co-existence together with a higher level of culturally integrated technology, economic progress (with less interference, and a less restricted experience of life. Environmental crisis =? catalyst for change. Di Castri in ‘91 (Francesco Di Castri, President of S.C.O.P.E., I.C.S.U., UNESCO Courier, November, 1991, p.41+) Let us hope that the environmental crisis, with all its gravity and complexity, may ultimately act as a catalyst for better communication in our laboratories, for greater flexibility in our administrative structures, and above all for greater equity between rich and poor countries, and towards the future generations to which we owe responsibility for the Earth which has been entrusted to us.
