| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,42 @@ |
|
1 |
+====The AFF is rife with examples of a thematic framing of human beings as benevolent protectors of the environment – monitoring, manipulating and controlling nature to ensure it functions in a systematically predictable way. This is a dangerous illusion that promotes futile managerial approaches to an untameable natural world.==== |
|
2 |
+Kuletz, '98 |
|
3 |
+~~Valerie Kuletz, University of Canterbury. The Tainted Desert: Environmental and Social Ruin in the American West. New York: Routledge, 1998. 285-287. // myost~~ |
|
4 |
+We have seen how comparing two sets of perceptions about the environment and their intellectual |
|
5 |
+ |
|
6 |
+AND |
|
7 |
+ |
|
8 |
+escapes our control—multiplying and taking on a life of its own. |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+ |
|
12 |
+====Next, the AFF's attempt to unify nature around a "sustainable" solution to ecological catastrophe fantasises the existence of a singular, harmonious Nature, rather than coming to terms with the facticity of multiple, contingent Natures. This presupposition mandates the imagining of ecological Armageddon as a tactic to stave off a more vital project of reimagining our relationship to the Earth.==== |
|
13 |
+Swyngedouw, '6 |
|
14 |
+**~~Erik Swyngedouw, University of Manchester. "Impossible 'Sustainability' and the Post-Political Condition." 2006. Also published in The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in the United States and Europe. Eds. Rob J. Krueger and David Gibbs. New York: The Guilford Press, 2007. www.liv.ac.uk/geography/seminars/Sustainabilitypaper.doc. // myost~~** |
|
15 |
+Slavoj Žižek suggests in Looking Awry that the current ecological crisis is indeed a radical |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+AND |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+be achieved, and what sort of natures do we wish to inhabit. |
|
20 |
+ |
|
21 |
+ |
|
22 |
+ |
|
23 |
+====The impact turns the case. Their construction of the environment as manageable by Human Will is responsible for the very ecological abuse they decry. Once presented as a mere standing reserve for human use, environmental destruction becomes not just possible, but natural.==== |
|
24 |
+Luke, '3 |
|
25 |
+**~~Timothy Luke, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. "Eco-Managerialism: Environmental Studies as a Power/Knowledge Formation." AURORA. 2003. http://aurora.icaap.org/index.php/aurora/article/view/79/91. // myost~~** |
|
26 |
+Before scientific disciplines and industrial technologies turn its' matter and energy into products, nature |
|
27 |
+ |
|
28 |
+AND |
|
29 |
+ |
|
30 |
+resources for a more thorough, rapid, and perhaps intensive utilization. |
|
31 |
+ |
|
32 |
+ |
|
33 |
+ |
|
34 |
+ |
|
35 |
+====The alternative is to do nothing. Don't be fooled – this isn't a question of passivity but of a releasement from the Will to Technology and an openness to the mystery of Being which transcends activity. Only such an ontological disarmament inaugurates new modes of revealing that don't depend on nature's subordination to human motivations.==== |
|
36 |
+McWhorter, '92 |
|
37 |
+~~Ladelle McWhorter, University of Richmond. Heidegger and the Earth: Issues in Environmental Philosophy. Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1992. 3-7. // myost~~ |
|
38 |
+Heidegger's work is a call to reflect to think in some way other than calculatively |
|
39 |
+ |
|
40 |
+AND |
|
41 |
+ |
|
42 |
+our very being, the configurations of subjective existence in our age. |