Dr. Gerry Lower, Keystone, South Dakota
OpEdNews.Com
America has recently fallen under the right wing JudeoRoman dominion of
the Bush administration. The result of that administration's
self-righteousness and belligerence in the world, according to Walter
Cronkite (Philadelphia Inquirer, Sept. 13, 2003), has been an
across-the-board loss of America's "national prestige" in the
eyes of the world. The Bush administration has led the people into an
unjustified and unsustainable war in the Middle East, it has done its
level best to destroy the Bill of Rights at home, and it has all but
dismissed multilateralism (which threatens capitalistic dominion) and
environmentalism (which threatens capitalistic dominion).
It is simply true that Bush's "compassionate" conservatism (one
would think conservatives would be into conservation) are actually quite
afraid of intellectual concepts like "the people" and "the
land," because these loaded terms always get in the way of
capitalistic "freedom" (i.e., license). It is instructive,
therefore, to consider the world views of those people who have made
America shine when it comes to caring for the people and the land. One
such person is Aldo Leopold (1887-1948), considered the Father of Wildlife
Ecology, a gifted teacher and philosopher at the University of Wisconsin,
whose views reside beneath virtually every conservation movement in
America and the educated world.
Aldo was born near Burlington, Iowa on the magnificent bluffs of the
Mississippi River, where he developed a deep appreciation for the natural
world, which seemed so capable of managing itself without human
intervention, the result of a vast interconnectedness which Leopold
ultimately became adept at identifying. As a result, he dedicated his life
to defining the natural world and it's unity in diversity. Aldo was a man
in love with the work of God, knowing that the better we comprehend the
natural world, the better we know our God.
His most famous book, "A Sand Country Almanac" (Oxford
University Press, NY, 1949), was in draft form when Aldo Leopold died in
1948, helping fight a fire. His son, Luna, saw this deeply thoughtful book
through to publication in 1949. The book even touches on cultural
influences, and its most insightful chapter is entitled, "The Land
Ethic." In this chapter, Leopold sets forth a scientific ethics based
on his empirical/logical grasp of the Land as an interconnected whole, as
a dynamic, living entity on its own.
He begins by defining an ethic as "a limitation on freedom of action
in the struggle for existence." In this very definition, we find the
reason why Leopold's ethics are ignored by those having made capitalism's
grasp of freedom into an American religion. Defining "freedom"
as doing pretty much as one pleases, capitalism honors a definition that
has no empirical basis in reality. One does not have to live in the upper
Mississippi Valley for very long to witness how the real world works, to
witness the majestic bald eagle, symbol of American pride, literally
chased out of a coulee by a snaggle of tiny sparrows, quite pissed off at
the eagle's presence in their aerial turf. Even eagles have to have some
respect for others, or they are simply "out of here."
In the mind of a man like Thomas Jefferson, of course, freedom has more to
do with being afforded an opportunity to learn of God's work, the world
and how it works, to think for oneself and to make one's own decisions in
the interest of the whole. It has nothing whatsoever to do with license,
which is (if you think about it) a remarkably adolescent notion of
freedom, a definition which has no place in it for obligation and duty.
Dennis Callahan at the Hasting's Institute has long ago referred to this
as "minimalist ethics," essentially an ethics which says you can
do anything you want as long as you don't hurt anybody. The Bush
administration, of course, has already broken the rules of even that
inadequate ethic. Furthermore, as Callahan pointed out, this shallow ethos
is only good as long "as the money is coming in." As soon as we
get into fiscal trouble and need help, that ethic is "out the
window."
Leopold goes on. "In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo
sapiens from conqueror of the land community to plain member and citizen
of it. It implies respect for his fellow members and also respect for the
community as such." Here again we have an approach to ethics which is
trampled every day by the Bush administration, in terms of it's
relationships to the people and the land.
Leopold's deepest insights, and most ignored insights, however, dealt with
cultural involvement in causing the loss and destruction of human life
support systems, the fact that the western JudeoRoman mindset has
traditionally had difficulty finding a land of "milk and honey"
with which it was satisfied and content to call home.
"In human history, we have learned (I hope) that the conqueror role
is eventually self-defeating. Why? Because it is implicit in such a role
that the conqueror knows, ex cathedra, just what makes the community clock
tick, and just what and who is valuable, and what and who is worthless, in
community life. It always turns out that he knows neither, and this is why
his conquests eventually defeat themselves." Sage advice, not so, for
a Bush administration that has attempted to make covetness and the
unprovoked conquest of other people and their land into a national way of
life, in perpetuity?
"In the biotic community, a parallel situation exists. Abraham knew
exactly what the land was for: it was to drip milk and honey into
Abraham's mouth. At the present moment, the assurance with which we regard
this assumption is inverse to the degree of our education."
In other words, the less education one has, the more likely one is to
abide if not support the JudeoRoman coveting, conquering mindset that has
driven imperialism, colonialism and capitalism, the mindset which
literally characterizes the Bush administration. Leopold, of course, was
speaking of a "higher" education, the type that ought come from
universities and the type that can, if one thinks for oneself, come from
actual experience in the natural world.
Leopold obtained a degree in forestry at Yale University and, like his
Wisconsin predecessor, John Muir, Leopold graduated into "the
University of the wilderness," in maintaining the "Wisconsin
tradition" in scientific ethics. That tradition was continued in 1970
with Van Potter's extension of Leopold's ethics into the medical realm as
"Bioethics" (Bioethics - Bridge to the Future, Prentice-Hall,
1970).
George Bush, our environmental president, obtained degrees at both Yale
and Harvard Universities, so one would think that America would be in
especially safe and knowledgeable hands. Unfortunately, George was from a
ruling, dynastic family of privilege, and he never found reason to apply
himself to his university studies, knowing that he would graduate as
privilege demands. George left Yale University for the wilderness of
capitalism, ultimately to find, with Billy Graham's guidance, the
traditional JudeoRoman approach to self-justification. After all, isn't a
lot of money, privilege and power ample indication of God's favor? In
return, Bush finds his purpose in life by doing his God's work, not caring
if "the people" failed to elect him, because he was elected by
divine intervention. As a result, he has little trepidation about making
God's decisions.
It is rather amazing that this man, who strolled the halls of Yale and
Harvard, could be so desperately shallow in historical and cultural
knowledge, so as to take an entire nation back into the dark ages of
self-righteous conquest. It would seem, by Leopold's standards, almost
requisite to shut Yale and Harvard Universities down until they can figure
out what is meant by a "higher" education.
Here we are witnessing, as always, a conflict of metaphysics, those
unchallenged assumptions we inherit from our parents and prevailing
cultural interpretations, those assumptions beneath the surface by which
we define ourselves, at least until we learn to think for ourselves in the
interest of growing up and making our own decisions. Bush and his
JudeoRoman supporters see "the people" and "the land,"
not as the core components of life, but as inexhaustible and complacent
resources, placed on this earth for the religious right wing elite to
exploit as necessary in order to keep "the money coming in."
Leopold saw the people and the land as having intimate and necessary
relationships that must be maintained in the interest of human survival.
With metaphysics juxtaposed in this manner and, of course, fervently
thinking for ourselves, a metaphysical choice is not particularly
difficult, now is it? Its more like part of being human.
Dr. Gerry Lower lives in Keystone, South Dakota. His primary concern is
the development of a rigorously-definable global philosophy and ethics
suitable for a global democracy. His new book, "Jefferson's Eyes -
Deist Views of Bush World," can be explored at www.jeffersonseyes.com
and he can be reached at tisland@blackhills.com
This
article is copyright by Dr. Gerry Lower and originally
published by opednews.com but
permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog, or web media so
long as this entire credit paragraph is attached