The Birth Of BLUE (Long Live Green)

Adam Werbach is a very controversial figure in certain (mainly older and/or purist) environmental circles. His company, Act Now Productions, works with a variety of companies (including Wal Mart) on improving sustainability. He’s criticized the traditional “environmentalist” movement, even declaring it dead. He gave a speech last week that’s worth highlighting. Apologies for the gratuitous excerpts, but I found it impossible to leave much more out. Courtesy of Grist (emphasis mine):

Tonight I invite you to join me in Wonderland. I ask you to consider joining me in building a movement that goes beyond the political to the personal, that views the existential threat of global warming as a chance to change the way we treat ourselves and the planet, that aspires to have one billion active participants across the earth. Tonight I’ll contend that we need to invest more time in making a difference through our routine activities and the things we buy every day. To achieve this we need a broader platform than green. [...]

[All over the world], I’ve seen people seeking something broader than a green or environmentalist solution to the myriad problems they face in their lives. Yes, they believe climate change is happening, but they also want to feel good about the way they look in the mirror and the way their kids look at them at the dinner table. They want to be part of something larger than themselves without having to sacrifice their identity. They want joy, not guilt, and a little money in their pocket so that they don’t have to trade down on yet one more thing in their life.

Building this new movement will require a commitment to the mainstream that we are unaccustomed to in San Francisco. It’s not enough to have a revolution that consists only of Mac users. It’s not enough to have a revolution that exists only in coastal states and college towns. It’s not enough to attack China as the home of lead-painted toys and neglect the aspirations of the hundreds of millions of people who have been brought out of abject poverty because we’ve bought those toys.

Something is happening now; progress seems at hand. We don’t know what to call it. For now let us call it the sustainability revolution — we are beginning to understand how human culture will harmonize its relationship with the living world. [...]

I’ve come to believe that changing the way people look at the world is more important in the long run than focusing only on the marginal ecological impact of the individual actions they take.

Eating organic food should be only one small articulation of the way you take care of yourself, your community and the planet. You can eat local, co-op grown, organic heirloom tomatoes and still be a bad person.

Green is good, but it frequently breaks down as a strategy when it hits the marketplace. The common green definition of sustainability, or “environmental sustainability,” is mainly concerned with the fate of the planet and how that affects our lives. For me, sustainability has four integrated streams: social, cultural, economic and environmental. All must exist in balance.

That’s why tonight I’m speaking about the birth of a new mass movement to complement and expand our existing political efforts. A movement not just for professionals or experts or people who can explain photosynthesis and lifecycle analysis. A movement we can call BLUE. This movement will have many faces, but at its heart it’s a lifestyle movement, a way to live a successful life. Many of us already have a regular practice that can reinforce our values. While political activism is at best a bi-annual pursuit, shopping is a regular activity for most people on the planet, and if trends continue, it will be for virtually everyone. We can either cede this field to the profit-driven marketeers, or we can share it.

Sure, much of the sustainability conversation seems to revolve around catch phrases or platitudes about human behavior and harmony. This speech may not seem any different, but I encourage you to read the whole thing and offer reactions in the comments. Is this just another attempt at making “green” palatable to the average Joe/Jane? Is Werbach offering something profoundly new, or simply framing the conversation in a useful way? Tom Friedman likes to say that by naming a movement, we own it. Now that Werbach has named BLUE, what are the chances that it will be successful?

Image used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user woodleywonderworks.