Test Drive | Page 77

NATURE IN THE ANTHROPOCENE 69 humanity is losing “a unique resource, a cradle of life, irreplaceable grandeur” (McKibben 1989: 13) the artificial is not at fault, nor is technological development. The problem lies with the prioritising of consumption for the wealthiest one percent of the world, which has caused global social inequality. Ecomodernist theory is unlikely to produce the “good Anthropocene” presented in its manifesto without first achieving social equality through the climate justice advocated by Kumi Naidoo – Greenpeace’s International Executive Director - who is calling for attention to the relationship between climate change and the global Northern/Southern hemisphere divide (Broder 2011). This departure from Greenpeace’s roots as purely an environmental movement only further emphasises the irrelevance of the natural/artificial distinction. Nevertheless, the power of cognitive dissonance is evident in humanity’s wilful instrumentalism. Humans are largely aware of and educated on the value of nature, the finite nature of the Earth’s resources, but in a system where some humans are arguably more equal than others, nature regresses to a “mere backdrop for human play” (McHarg cited in Watson and Sharpe 1993: 212). That is, nature’s scarce resources continue to be plundered in order to facilitate humanity’s desire for greater affluence in terms of materialistic possession. Ultimately, it is our refusal – not our inability – to accept nature as including both the human and non-human world that threatens humanity’s status in the Anthropocene. This denial will escalate humanity’s propensity to seek comfort in the artificial as illustrated below. Ultimately, the distinction between the natural and the artificial is irrelevant in the Anthropocene. In its place, is the reality of climate change which thrusts our interdependence with nature upon us. Therefore, in order to curb the impacts of the ecological crisis and avoid the apocalyptic scenarios portrayed in The Age of Stupid (2009), apathy must be confronted. However, a new period of enlightenment is required in order for humanity to intrinsically value the Earth. This does not require the “noble savage” lifestyle (Riley 2001: 5), but humanity must find a harmony with nature that does not require producing the current “brand of … artificial” (Schumacher 1973: 276) which is unsustainable.