"Now that every day is Earth Day, we need a new kind of holiday. We need an annual break from bad environmental news.Now I can hear the chorus of objections rising...
The year-round glumfest about drowning polar bears, dying honeybees and the general futility of it all is raising consciousness but crushing spirits (or at least mine). We need a day of rest — a time to pretend, as we did in the 1990s, that the party could last forever.
The other 364 days we can stick to the new normal, flogging ourselves about carbon and fretting about an uncertain future."
"...but wait, the problems aren't solved yet..."
"...people don't know how bad things really are..."
"...we need to get serious and implement stronger actions..."
All of them true, but all unfortunately delivered as dire doses of doom. What drives this gloomy approach? Is it a desire to infect everyone with the sad pessimism that pervades the environmental movement? (I know about that pessimism, I'm part of the movement and I hear it every day.)
She says we've won and we don't realize it. Everyone now knows that we're right, and it's time for a new strategy to get people moving towards solutions.
I can see the merit in Nielsen's point, and I like her idea. For just one day, it would be a good idea to try to deliver all environmental news with optimism and a sense of hope.
There's nothing wrong with optimism. Try it, you just might like it. Tweet